Dialogues On Eastern Wisdom

Special Series:
Dialogues on Eastern Wisdom (1)
Ji Xianlin
Jiang Zhongxin
Daisaku Ikeda
As the curtain rises on the 21st century, how will humankind create a
“century of life”? How can the East and the West work together toward
world peace and the glory of human civilization? The idea of a dialogue
between three eminent scholars, each of whom has helped to open up the
“wisdom of the East” to the world, was conceived at a meeting in 1980
between Prof. Ji Xianlin and Daisaku Ikeda, president of Soka Gakkai
International (SGI). Joined by Prof. Jiang Zhongxin, their three-way
dialogue continues today via correspondence. The dialogue focuses on
Oriental thought and the Lotus Sutra, in the process offering insight into
the true nature of Eastern and Western civilizations. The discussion
begins with the topics of “Human Nature and Society” and “Eastern
Culture and Western Culture,” proceeds to the concept that “Heaven and
Humankind Are Merged in One”—the essence of Chinese philosophy—
and from there to “A Criticism on Opinions That Mahayana Buddhism
Was Not Preached by Buddha” and “A Discussion on the Lotus Sutra.”
With the kind permission of the three scholars, the Institute has decided
to reproduce a series of extracts from their dialogue.
HUMAN NATURE AND SOCIETY

Ji: It is both an unparalleled honor and a pleasure for me to have this
opportunity to engage in these discussions with you, Mr. Ikeda. Look-
ing over your various published works, particularly your dialogues with
Arnold Toynbee that appeared in English under the title Choose Life, I
feel that in many respects our opinions with regard to various questions
must be the same, or very close in nature. For that reason, I believe that
this chance that we have to exchange views will surely be profitable for
us both.
Ikeda: Thank you for those kind words. It is indeed a delight for me to
have this unexpected opportunity to talk with a person such as yourself,
one of the most distinguished scholars of China and someone who is
my senior both in years and experience in life.
2
DIALOGUES ON EASTERN WISDOM (1) 3
I am also delighted that Professor Jiang Zhongxin of the Chinese

Academy of Social Sciences, who was one of your former students,
Professor Ji, is able to participate in our discussions. I will join him in
the “student” category and will thus feel at greater ease in making my
contributions to the discussion.
When I engaged in the dialogues with Dr. Toynbee that you have just
mentioned, I was forty-four years old. At that time Dr. Toynbee said to
me, “Dialogue is the only means by which to open a viable way for
humanity. You are still young. I hope you will continue to engage in
dialogues with the intellectual leaders of the world.” And at that time,
Dr. Toynbee voiced the opinion that China would play a key role in the
future in bringing about world unity.
Now, in this last year of the twentieth century, as we face the third
millennium of our era, I feel it is highly significant that I should join in
these discussions with two of the intellectual leaders of China.
Jiang: I am rather embarrassed that Mr. Ikeda should include me

among the intellectual leaders of China—surely he exaggerates. Profes-
sor Ji in my highly respected teacher from former times, and Mr. Ikeda
is my most highly respected seniors. That I, a mere student, should be
afforded this opportunity to participate in such meaningful discussions
for me a truly great stroke of fortune. I will do my best to be worthy of
the honor and to learn all I can from these two distinguished partici-
pants.
Ji: Since we have mentioned the Toynbee dialogues, I would like to

begin the discussion with the question raised in them, one of the most
basic questions pertaining to human beings, namely, the question of
human nature.
It seems to me that there are two main aspects to this question. First,
just what is human nature and how is it to be defined? And second,
what is the nature of good, and what is the nature of evil? This question
of good and evil has always been a very important one in the history of
Chinese philosophy, and one taken up often in the philosophy of other
countries of the world.
Ikeda: Just as you say, the question of just what constitutes the nature
of human beings and of what constitutes good are basic to all concerns
of human life. These are questions that have long occupied the religions
and philosophical systems of past and present, east and west alike.
For example, in ancient Greece, Plato criticized the belief held by the
4 DIALOGUES ON EASTERN WISDOM (1)
Sophists that “the good is that which is pleasurable.” In contrast to this

view he expounded his Idea of the Good, a concept that concerns the
true nature of all living beings.
Christianity, inheriting the Judaic concept of a single god, viewed
philosophy as “the handmaid of theology.” As this phrase suggests, its
concern was less with the inner makeup of human beings than it was
with the relationship between human beings and God. With regard to
the nature of good, therefore, it proceeded on the premise that goodness
is that which pertains to God.
In contrast to these beliefs, if we survey the overall development of
Chinese philosophy, we see that it is marked by one outstanding charac-
teristic.
In the past I have had the honor of delivery lectures at Peking Univer-
sity on three occasions—in 1980, 1984, and 1990. On each of these
occasions, I was warmly welcomed by Professor Ji, and I take this
opportunity to once more extend my thanks. In 1992 I also had a chance
to deliver a lecture at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. In all of
these addresses, I stressed that Chinese philosophy has consistently
used the human being as its standard or fixed point of reference.
In Chinese thought, the concept of tian or Heaven is in some ways
comparable to the concept of God in the monotheistic thought of West-
ern culture. But while God and the human being are viewed as separate
entities in monotheistic thought, in Chinese thought there is no such
separation between Heaven and human beings. As the tradition phrase
has it, “Heaven and humankind are merged in one.”
In other words, Heaven exists within the individual. Thus the main-
stream of Chinese thought speaks of the “heavenly nature” that is inher-
ent in humankind. I would like to speak more a little later about this
concept of the unity of Heaven and the human being.
Chinese philosophy thus focuses its attention upon the human being,
never ceasing to consider the relationships that exist between the human
being and society or between the human being and the natural world.
During the troubled years of the Spring and Autumn and Warring States
periods, the leaders of the so-called Hundred Schools of Chinese
thought appeared, like so many stars in a galaxy, to propound their
views, each striving to act as a teacher and advisor to the ruler in guid-
ing human society along the path of proper development.
Mencius: Human Nature Is Good
Jiang: I recall in the fall of 1992, you, Mr. Ikeda, were given the title of
Honorary Research Professor of the Chinese Academy of Social Sci-
ences, and you delivered your lecture at the time you received the title.
In your lecture, which was entitled “An Ethos of Symbiosis,” you dis-
cussed the concept of symbiosis in East Asian culture and presented
penetrating analysis of Confucian thought and the historical role it has
played in that culture.
I was fortunate in being able to attend the lecture and learned much
from it. I was particularly impressed by the fact that you cited the late
Premier Zhou Enlai as an example of the ideal human embodiment of
the “Ethos of Symbiosis.”
Ji: In China the debate on the question of human nature dates back to
the Confucian school of the pre-Qin period. Book 7, part A of the Con-
fucian text known as the Mencius states: “Mencius said,.... That which a
gentleman follows as his nature is not added to when he holds sway
over the Empire, nor is it detracted from when he is reduced to straight-
ened circumstances. This is because he knows his allotted station. That
which a gentleman follows as his nature, that is to say, benevolence,
rightness, the rites and wisdom, is rooted in his heart and manifests
itself in his face, giving it a sleek appearance. It also shows in his back
and extends to his limbs, rendering their message intelligible without
words.”
The Confucian philosopher Mengzi or Mencius here is saying that
the qualities of benevolence, rightness, rites and wisdom, which make up
his Heaven-given nature, are inherent in him from the time of his birth.
This assertion of Mencius that the nature of the human being is inher-
ently good has for over two thousand years exercised a profound influ-
ence over Chinese philosophy. In the Three Character Classic, a text
that in traditional Chinese society was used as a primer for children
learning to read, we see this influence reflected in the very opening
words, which read: “Human beings at birth / Are naturally good. / Their
natures are much the same / But nurture causes them to draw apart.”
Ikeda: One reason that Mencius’ theory of the innate goodness of

human nature has for so long been recognized as the orthodox doctrine
of Confucian teaching is no doubt the fact that it is based on Confucius
doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven and fits well with his concept of
Heaven. It holds, that is, that the nature with which we are endowed at
birth is “heaven-bestowed” or heavenly in its characteristics. Thus it
must be marked by goodness, just as Heaven itself is.
Jiang: This is the idea stated in the opening words of another important
Confucian text, the Zhongyong or Mean, which read: “What Heaven

has endowed is called the nature. Following that nature is called the
Way.”
Ji: Mencius develops his theory of the goodness of human nature

through his debate with the philosopher Gaozi, who held that human
nature is neither good nor not-good. Gaozi refused to assent to Men-
cius’ view of the goodness of human nature. On the contrary, he stated:
“The nature is like swirling water. Open a passage for it in the east, and
it will flow east; open a passage for it in the west, and it will flow west.
Human nature does not distinguish between good and not-good any
more than water distinguishes between east and west.” (Mencius, Bk.
6A)
Ikeda: Mencius replies to Gaozi’s argument in the following way: “It is

true that water does not distinguish between east and west, but does it
fail to distinguish between up and down? The goodness of human
nature is like the downward course of water. There is no human being
lacking in the tendency to do good, just as there is no water lacking in
the tendency to flow downward.” This is how Mencius develops his
argument.
Jiang: Mencius’ theory of the goodness of human nature is closely

allied with the idea of good expressed by Confucius, particularly as
embodied in the moral ideal of ren, which is usually translated as
benevolence or humaneness. Confucius’ ideal of ren may be taken to
mean loving others—that is, the humane or benevolent person is one
who loves others.
This concept of humaneness or love for others finds expression in
two different aspects of human behavior. One aspect is embodied in the
saying, “If you would progress, you must first help others to progress; if
you would attain something, you must first help others to attain it.” The
other is expressed in the word, “What you do not want others to do to
you, do not do to others.”
Mencius said that a heart that cannot bear to look on the misfortune
of others without being moved is a heart of humaneness. And he
believed that all persons are endowed with a heart that will not permit
them to do injury to others. The reason that people possess this inward
virtue of humaneness, that they cannot look on the misfortune of others
without being moved in heart, that impels them to love others, is the
fact that human nature is inherently good. Thus Mencius’ theory of the
goodness of human nature and the ideal of humaneness or love of others
expounded by Confucius belong to the same line of thought, the same
philosophical tradition.
Xunzi: Human Nature Is Evil
Ji: As you know, however, there was a quite different theory of human
nature propounded by Xunzi or Xun Kuang, who was born around 310
B.C.E., shortly before the founding of the Qin dynasty. He was a repre-
sentative of one branch of the Confucian school, but opposed the Men-
cian theory of the goodness of human nature, instead asserting that it is
in fact evil in nature.
In an essay entitled “Human Nature Is Evil,” he writes: “Human
nature is evil; its goodness derives from conscious activity.” The word
that Xunzi uses to designate this “conscious activity,” wei, in modern
Chinese has the meaning of “false,” as in the term “true or false.” But
Xunzi is using it in a somewhat different sense. What he means is that
the physiological components of a human being are possessed from the
time of birth, but that the aspects of the individual’s character that per-
tain to matters of etiquette and morality are the result of conscious
human activity—they are human creations.
The innate nature of the human being is simply the basis to which
human activity or effort is then applied. But if there were no such innate
nature, then there would be nothing to which human activity could be
applied. On the other hand, only after such conscious human activity
has been applied to the innate nature does it manifest the quality of
beauty.
Xunzi says: “Mencius said, the fact that human beings learn shows
that their nature is good. I say this is not so; this comes of his having
neither understood human nature nor perceived the distinction between
the nature and conscious activity. The nature is what is given by Heav-
en; one cannot learn it; one cannot acquire it by effort.”
Xunzi is saying that the human nature of the individual is what is
inherent in him or her from the time of birth. It is not something
learned, but naturally endowed at the time of birth. But standards of eti-
quette and moral values are created by the sages and hence such values
are not innately present in the individual.
What Xunzi means by the term “evil” is the physiological makeup of
the individual, the natural wants and desires of the living being—some-
thing like what we in present day terms would call human instinct.
Ikeda: Xunzi’s political thought, particularly in comparison to that of

Confucius and Mencius, lays less stress upon the concept of virtue and
more on that of ritual—he advocates a kind of governance by means of
ritual principles. At the same time, I think we can say that he regards as
important not so much the Heaven-endowed nature that the individual is
born with, but rather the cultivation and refinement that can be brought
to this nature through the influence of learning.
As you have just pointed out, Professor Ji, Xunzi’s concept of evil is
not the same as that of “original sin” found in Christian teaching, but
closer to what we would call human instinct.
Ji: Xunzi is of course clearly wrong when he refers to instinct as evil.

Human beings may, as the traditional phrase has it, represent “the lord
of all creation,” but they are still no more than a species of animal. And
as both the researches of the scientists and the observations of ordinary
individuals tell us, all living beings, animal and plant alike, are endowed
with instincts.
To go into the nature of instinct would lead us into a very complicat-
ed discussion, but we may here simply say that animals display three
types of instinct. These are, namely, the instinct for survival, the instinct
for adequate food and warmth, and the instinct for development. By the
instinct for development I mean both the instinct for the growth and
development of the individual being, and for some sort of development
or perpetuation after its death, or what we would call the desire for the
survival and continuation of its genetic line.
The philosopher Gaozi, whom we referred to earlier in our discussion
of Mencius, declared that “The appetite for food and sex is the nature.”
The desire for food may apply to all three of the types of instinct I have
just mentioned, while that for sex applies to the instinct for the continu-
ation of the descendents of the individual.
Instinct is a concept that applies to physiological factors, while the
terms good and evil are ethical in nature. One must not confuse these
two categories. If one takes instinct to be the innate nature of the human
being, then one cannot say that it is either good or bad. Neither the the-
ory of the goodness of nature nor the theory of its evilness can be
proved in this manner.
If I were to state my own view of human nature, I would say that it is
basically much like that put forward by Gaozi, though there are many
aspects in which my view would differ from his. In any event, such a
question is quite different in nature from that relating to the definition
of good and evil. What I think we should consider here is the question
of where this thing called human instinct comes from—what I have

referred to earlier as the instinct for survival, for food, and for growth or
development.
Different religions give different answers to this question. Some say
that instinct is “the gift of the gods” or endowed in one by King
Mahåbrahman. Those brought up in the Chinese cultural sphere say that
it comes from the Creator or Old Man Heaven.
Proponents of Buddhism speak of the egolessness of the living being,
of the five components that make up such a being, or of the union of
causes and conditions that brings such a being into existence. Buddhism
thus offers an explanation that is quite different from the other explana-
tions I have referred to, one that operates on a higher and more sophisti-
cated plane.
The Buddhist Concept of Dependent Origination
Ikeda: The technical terms you have just cited, Professor Ji, are all
related to the Buddhist concept of dependent origination. According to
this view, when one particular cause or set of causes exists, then a cer-
tain result comes about; when one entity comes into being, so does
another entity. In other words, the manifold phenomena of creation do
not exist as separate entities or come into being as such—all are linked
to one another and come into being through mutual interaction.
Both human beings and other living beings represent a temporary
combination or joining together of the so-called five components, name-
ly, form, perception, conception, volition, and consciousness. The indi-
vidual being is nothing more than a temporary coming together of these
five elements.
The term “form” refers to the material aspect of the being, the physi-
cal body of an animal or a human being, its physiological functions.
With this material aspect as their basis, the other four components,
which represent the mental functions of the being, make their appear-
ance.
The form or material component of the being regulated and main-
tained through the physiological functions, and it is from this aspect of
the individual being that instinct arises. Through the combination of the
physical form of the individual and the mental components—percep-
tion, conception, volition, and consciousness—the high level mental
and spiritual activities of the human being are made possible, and it is
on this level of development that we may begin to speak of ethical con-
cepts.
The states characterized by the concepts of good and evil are depen-
dent upon the type of consciousness that is developed in the human

being. If the consciousness of the individual is dominated by bonnØ—
earthly desires or deluded passions—then the individual is characterized
by an “evil mind.” But when bodhi or enlightenment becomes the domi-
nant factor in the consciousness of the individual, then the evil mind is
transformed into a mind of goodness. The view of the individual as a
temporary combination of the five components thus agrees with the dis-
tinction that Professor Ji has just made between the instinct of the indi-
vidual, which represents a physiological concept, and the qualities of
good or evil, which represent an ethical concept.
Ji: My own view is that the instincts of living organisms have nothing
to do with good or evil. If you wish to speak in terms of good or evil,
then I would say that, as far as living beings are concerned, the instincts
for survival, for food and warmth, and for development are all good.
However, the Creator did not make just one kind of living being—he
made a huge number of different beings. If he had made only one kind
of living being, then the problem would be very simple. That one kind
of living would be free to follow its instincts, to develop without any
hindrance or outward restraints, until in time it had spread all over the
globe, until the whole world was filled with just that one kind of being.
But that is not what the Creator did. He created many different kinds
of living beings, and as a result, clashes and contradictions arose among
them. Every living being learned to fight for the space needed to insure
its own survival, and human beings were the first to take up the fight. It
would almost seem as though the Creator were playing a joke on living
beings.
The Chinese philosopher Laozi no doubt had this situation in mind
when he declared that “Heaven and Earth are not humane, / Regarding
all things as straw dogs.” In ancient China, straw images of dogs were
fashioned for use in religious ceremonies, but after they had served their
purpose, they were discarded as useless. Laozi is suggesting that Heav-
en and Earth treat living beings in the same callous fashion.
The Creator on the one hand urges living beings to develop in accor-
dance with their innate instincts, but on the other hand curbs that
process of development so that all living beings will have a chance to
develop. At the same time that the Creator creates a particular type of
being, he also creates another being or beings that will oppose it and act
as its natural enemy. In this way a balance is preserved, and no one par-
ticular type of being is permitted to monopolize the living space avail-
able in the world.
Ikeda: These terms that Professor Ji has been using such as Creator or
Heaven refer, I would guess, to the concept known in Buddhism as the
universal life force. This universal life force is also designated by the
words Buddha or Thus Come One, and in the Lotus Sutra by the term
“Original Buddha from time without beginning.”
As Professor Ji has just indicated, this universal life force acts to
maintain a state of harmony among the manifold beings of creation,
working to nourish and sustain all forms of vital life. In Buddhism this
dynamic force for harmony is known as compassion.
Ji: But human beings, because of their special abilities, stand out above
all the other beings of the animal kingdom, and of course above those of
the plant kingdom. And this is where the problem of good and evil
comes in.
Living beings other than humans care only about their own survival
and development and take no thought for other types of beings. As we
have seen, the Creator or the forces of Nature impose this restriction
upon them. But human beings are not like this. Human beings are not
only impelled by instinct, but are capable of controlling and directing
their instincts so that, in addition to working for their own development,
they are capable of aiding the development of other human beings or
other types of beings.
Ikeda: Yes. This concern for both “self and others” that arises out of
the life force of human beings and works for the advancement of both
self and others is what is known as compassion. The thirteenth century
Japanese Buddhist leader Nichiren in his lectures on the Lotus Sutra
describes this state as “rejoicing in both self and others.”
Characteristics of the Human Life Force
Ji: When human beings reach this level of development, only then, I
believe, can we begin talk about the concept of goodness. Goodness, I
would say, is in direct proportion to the amount of control that is exer-
cised over instinct. In this sense, the qualities of good and evil are
imposed at a later stage than is instinct, which is inborn. In this respect I
am in general in agreement with the view of Mencius.
Ikeda: Speaking from the point of view of a Buddhist believer, I would

agree with what Professor Ji has just said. To exert oneself for the sake
of others, to act compassionately, is one of the characteristic marks of
the human life force. We have spoken earlier of the concept of egoless-
ness—this is the ego or self that benefits others. For this reason, in Bud-
dhism this human life force is often referred to as the vessel or instru-
ment of the Dharma or the “correct instrument of the Sacred Way.”
These terms indicate that human beings have within them the ability
to become enlightened to and to embody the compassion and wisdom
that are present within the universal life force, and to give living expres-
sion to these qualities through the human revolution.
Ji: I would say that at present it is very simple to set up a standard by

which one may judge whether an individual is a good person or a bad
person. If the individual spends sixty percent or more of his or her time
and effort thinking about how to benefit others, and the remaining forty
percent thinking of his or her own benefit, then that individual is a good
person. The higher the proportion of time and effort spent thinking
about others, the higher the proportion of goodness in the individual.
But if the proportion spent thinking of one’s own benefit is more than
forty percent, such an individual cannot be called a good person.
Strictly speaking, however, there is no human being who can so com-
pletely master and overcome his instincts that he gives no thought at all
for his own benefit but thinks solely of the benefits of others.
Ikeda: That’s a very clear answer to the question of how to define good
and evil. The definition of goodness you have just given, Professor Ji,
corresponds well with the ideal of the Bodhisattva Way as set forth in
Mahayana Buddhism.
Listening to Professor Ji’s remarks just now, I am reminded of the
Ten Worlds or ten realms of existence expounded in the philosophy of
the Chinese Tiantai or T’ien-t’ai school of Buddhism. T’ien-t’ai thought
holds that the original nature of the human being is endowed with both
good and evil elements, the so-called “nature good” and “nature evil.”
In contrast to these, the good or evil that are actually manifested in the
life condition of the living being are termed “practiced good” or “prac-
ticed evil.” The theory of the Ten Worlds explains how one can advance
step by step through a series of stages as a result of the “practiced
good” that one carries out in one’s actual life, that is, the degree to
which one excels in benefiting others.
In the theory of the Ten Worlds, the lowest levels, those of hell
dwellers, hungry spirits, beasts, and asura demons—the so-called “three
evil realms of existence” or “four evil realms of existence”—represent
realms manifested by a life condition that is concerned wholly with
self-profit. These correspond, I assume, to what Professor Ji has termed
the evil person. According to Buddhist thought, such realms or life con-
ditions are marked by suffering.
The good person in Professor Ji’s definition corresponds to the realm
of the bodhisattva or of the Buddha, the realm of one whose life condi-
tion is marked by control of the instincts. The term Buddha designates a
life characterized by ultimate goodness. But followers of Buddhism
such as myself aim rather to carry out the way or ideal of the bodhisatt-
va, one who in actual society strives constantly to increase the propor-
tion of activity that is devoted to benefiting or aiding others.
Jiang: Let me see if I can summarize what you two gentlemen have
been saying.
The human being, or human instincts, are something inborn or part of
the being from the time of birth. We are dealing here with a physiologi-
cal concept. But when we speak of human goodness or evil, we are
referring to behavior that is learned or acquired some time after birth.
To say that someone does good or does evil is to apply an ethical con-
cept.
These two types of concepts must not be confused. If they are con-
fused, then one becomes involved in self-contradiction. Both the theory
that human nature is innately good and the theory that it is innately evil
are guilty of such contradiction.
The theory that human nature is innately good fails to answer the
question why, if people are innately good, evil behavior should arise in
society. And the theory that human nature is evil fails to explain why, if
people are innately evil, good behavior should arise in society.
As Professor Ji has pointed out, there is one very important differ-
ence between human beings and animals, namely, the fact that human
beings are capable of controlling their instincts. The degree to which a
given individual may be said to be good or evil thus depends upon the
degree to which the individual controls his or her instincts.
Strictly speaking, such control of the instincts comes about as a result
of education and practice over an extended period of time. It is by no
means easy to attain. Ethical or moral advancement is much more diffi-
cult to accomplish than intellectual advancement or technological
advancement.
The goodness or evil of the individual is something that takes shape
gradually, as the individual, acting as a member of society, becomes
involved in various social relationships and is subject to various envi-
ronmental influences. As the traditional saying has it, “Stay around red
ink and you get red, stay around black ink and you get black.”
Confucian “Humaneness” and Buddhist “Compassion”
Ikeda: One of Nichiren’s most important writings is entitled “On
Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land.” It is in the
form of a dialogue between a host and a guest, and as the guest listens
to the arguments of the host, he gradually becomes convinced of the
rightness of the host’s opinions.
The host then exclaims, “How gratifying! By associating with a
friend who inhabits orchid-scented rooms, you have taken on the same
scent; and like the mugwort growing in the hemp field, you have
learned to stand up straight!” The latter part of the sentence is based on
the belief that if mugwort plans grow up in a hemp field, they will learn
to stand up straight as the hemp plants do.
This is an example of the kind of “environmental influence” you have
just been speaking of.
Jiang: Yes. And there is the famous tale of how the mother of the
philosopher Mencius moved three times in order that her young son
would be in an environment conducive to his proper education and
moral training. This is an illustration of the same principle.
Since goodness, which we have defined as the control of the instincts,
is something that is learned later and is not innate at the time of birth, it
is most important for the continuance and advancement of human cul-
ture that persons of learning should fulfill their historical responsibili-
ties by taking a leading role in educational endeavors for the betterment
of society as a whole.
Confucius described himself as one who “learns without flagging”
and who “teaches without growing weary.” And in this he typifies the
degree to which the Confucius school has traditionally emphasized the
importance of education and learning.
Confucianism stresses the importance of “practicing the way and
nourishing virtue,” while Mahayana Buddhism regards it as most impor-
tant to “practice the bodhisattva way.” Both represent positive social
doctrines that see education as a means of directing human beings
toward the attainment of goodness. The ideal of benevolence or
humaneness espoused by Confucianism and that of compassion advo-
cated by Mahayana Buddhism are both ethical ideals or concepts that
are one in nature. Confucius expressed the idea by saying, “If you
would progress, you must help others to progress,” while the “bodhisatt-
va way” expounded in Mahayana Buddhism teaches that if you would
seek salvation yourself, you must work for the salvation of others.
Among Chinese people, a kind or a good person is often referred to
as a “bodhisattva,” and doing good to others is lauded as an expression
of a “bodhisattva heart.”
Human Beings and Their Relationship with Society
Ji: Next I would like to consider the relationships between human
beings and society.
I believe that in the course of a lifetime, human beings have many
aims and obligations that they must carry out, and the question of just
how they should do so is a highly complex one. But we may perhaps
say that these obligations can be reduced to two fundamental categories.
First, people must deal in a proper manner with their fellow human
beings. The education and training of the individual plays an important
part in this question, since it forms the basis for a correct handling of
one’s relations with other human beings.
Second, people must deal correctly with the relationship between
“heaven and man,” that is, between human beings and the natural world.
These two concerns represent the basic questions confronted in human
life, and everyone, whether consciously or unconsciously, must face up
to them.
Human beings cannot divorce themselves from society. Ancient India
had its hermits and ancient China its gentlemen who lived a life of
reclusion. But although such persons claimed that they were severing all
their connections with society, in fact such a total withdrawal is impos-
sible. No person can avoid having relationships with other human
beings, and then problems or irritations arise through such relationships,
some way must be found to solve or harmonize them.
This question of human relations is one of enormous importance, and
all the world’s major religions, which exercise a great influence in such
matters, have each indicated how they think the problem should be dealt
with. The Confucian teachings of China lay great stress upon the prob-
lem, and discuss it at length and in a very practical manner.
Ikeda: Just as you have stated, the Chinese Confucian writings provide
us with a veritable treasure-house of wisdom on the ethical ideals that
should be observed in the relations between one person and another. It
is only natural that today, as we stand on the threshold of the twenty-
first century, there should be renewed interest in these essential ideals
expounded in the Confucian ethical writings.
Mahayana Buddhism too makes clear that religion should at all times
concern itself with questions of human relations and society, and is crit-
ical of any attitude or style of life that attempts to withdraw from soci-
ety or transcend social values.
Chapter 19 of the Lotus Sutra, entitled “Benefits of the Teacher of the
Law,” describing those who expound the Law or teachings of the Bud-
dha, says, “the words they speak will in all cases represent the Law of
the Buddha, never departing from the truth.” And the Chinese Buddhist
leader, Tiantai, commenting on this passage in his Profound Meaning of
the Lotus Sutra, states, “The regulating and productive activities of life
[i.e., political and economic activities]—none of these depart from the
truth.”
And Nichiren, following the same train of thought, in a short piece
entitled “The Kalpa of Decrease,” writes: “A person of wisdom is not
one who practices Buddhism apart from worldly affairs but, rather, one
who thoroughly understands the principles by which the world is gov-
erned.”
The bodhisattva ideal expressed in Mahayana Buddhism draws its
vitality from the concept of compassion, a concept that is basically one
in nature with that of benevolence or humaneness as expounded by
Confucius. Now is surely the time for all humankind to reappraise and
put into practice these ethical values of humaneness and compassion
that have been nourished over the centuries by the people of eastern
Asia.
Jiang: I am in complete agreement with Mr. Ikeda when he states that

we must learn to reappraise and carry out these ethical values of benev-
olence and compassion that have been developed by the east Asian peo-
ples. I believe that this is the correct approach and one that is highly
realistic in nature.
Today, when humankind is about to embark on the twenty-first centu-
ry, everyone must recognize that the various types of advanced technol-
ogy that have developed so far—information technology, biotechnolo-
gy, nanotechnology, etc.—will continue to develop at the same rapid
rate as in the past. But technology itself, we must realize, is a double-
edged sword, capable of bringing great benefit to humanity, but also of
unleashing injury and devastating misfortune upon the human race as
well.
This has already been fully demonstrated by the two types of poten-
tialities—those for beneficial use and those for destruction—that are
associated with nuclear technology. And scientists inform us that the
three new types of technology I have just mentioned, which are now
developing so rapidly, pose threats that are far greater than those posed
by nuclear technology.
It is not too much to say, therefore, that all of humanity at present
stands at the crossroads of life and death, survival and destruction.
Faced with such circumstances, there is only one path by which human
beings can hope to remain alive. They must insure that these technolo-
gies that have been newly acquired are used for the benefit and happi-
ness of humanity and do not become a threat to it. In particular, we
must find some method of assuring that these new technologies are not
employed to create weapons that are more threatening to humanity than
nuclear arms. And the only way to accomplish this is by devoting all
our energy to the practice of these ethical ideals of humaneness and
compassion that have been developed by the peoples of eastern Asia.
If all persons, particularly those who command power and wealth,
can learn to carry out the Confucian saying quoted earlier, “What you
do not want others to do to you, do not do to others,” that would consti-
tute the most fundamental guarantee we could hope for the maintenance
of world peace and the happiness of humanity.
I believe that, while human beings should regard technological
advancement as of great importance, they should attach even greater
importance to the concepts of good and evil as these are embodied in
the human beings who control technology. Ethical concerns, those that
teach how people can best proceed in their relations with one another,
should be accorded the position of highest importance.
Human Beings and Their Relationship with Nature
Ji: I have spoken earlier of the need to deal correctly with the relation-
ship between “heaven and man,” and I would like now to address this
question.
What do we mean by the word “heaven”? The various religions of
the world have each given its own interpretation of the entity or entities
that are referred to by this term. Some describe “heaven” as a kind of
person—a divine person, if you will—who possesses a form and will.
Others see it not as a personality but rather as a kind of governing prin-
ciple, a directing force that insures that the countless phenomena of the
universe carry out their movements in an orderly fashion.
My own understanding of the term “heaven” is that it refers to what
we normally call Nature. It designates all the living beings on the earth
such as animals and plants that surround human beings and make up
their living environment. The term is thus relative to that designating
human beings, and in some sense stands in contrast to it.
Before human beings had become what they are now, they were sim-
ple another type of animal. As such, they constituted a part of Nature.
Heaven and man blended together harmoniously into a single entity and
there was no kind of opposition between them.
But as human beings acquired the powers of intellect and came to
surpass other animals in this respect, becoming in effect true human
beings, then they began in some aspects to stand in opposition to the
natural world, and they became, as the phrase has it, the lords of cre-
ation.
Nevertheless, in the larger sense, human beings continue as before to
constitute a part of what we call Nature.
Ikeda: I agree with this opinion, namely, that human beings basically
are part of the natural order.
Buddhism, which has been called a philosophy of causal relations,
describes this close causal relationship that exists and must be main-
tained between human beings and the realm of nature.
Miaole, a scholar of the Chinese Tiantai school of Buddhism, in his
Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra, discusses this
relationship that exists between human beings and nature or their envi-
ronment, employing the term “the oneness of life and its environment.”
The word “life” here designates the living self of the being or the
subjective world, while the word “environment” refers to the insentient
environment or the objective world. If we take the term “life” to refer to
human beings, then the term “environment” will refer to the global sur-
roundings in which the human being lives, including its living organ-
isms.
The relationship between the life force of human beings and the eco-
logical conditions that surround them in Nature is described by the
somewhat paradoxical term “two but not two.”
Nichiren, referring to this doctrine of the “oneness of life and its
environment”, in a piece entitled “On Omens” speaks of the term “life”
in the following manner: “The ten directions are the ‘environment’ and
living beings are ‘life.’ To illustrate, environment is like the shadow,
and life the body. Without the body, no shadow can exist, and without
life, no environment. In the same way, life is shaped by its environ-
ment.”
If we take the life force of the human being to be equivalent to what
Nichiren here calls the “body,” then the environment is like the “shad-
ow.” Just as the shadow cannot exist apart from the body, so human
beings at all times form a single entity with their environment.
And if we wish to describe the mutual relations that exist between

human beings and the environment in these terms, we would say that
the living self depends upon the environment for its existence. That is,
human beings depend upon the workings of the environment or natural
ecological conditions for their growth and development. And converse-
ly, as indicated by the statement above that “without life [there is] no
environment,” the environment must wait for the activities of human
beings in order to take on a particular shape or undergo changes.
Human beings thus play a key role in the creation of a particular envi-
ronment, and must bear the responsibility for such creation.
Eastern and Western Views of Nature
Ji: Since human beings from the beginning lived within the natural
world, they could not carry out the activities needed to acquire food,
clothing, shelter and other necessities without doing so in relation to
nature. They could not remain indifferent to nature, since all the things
they needed for their livelihood were obtained from the natural world.
The question then is, how do they go about obtaining these things
from nature? It seems to me there are two ways of doing so. If I may
borrow the terminology of the “Gang of Four” era, one method may be
called “armed struggle,” and the other “peaceful struggle without resort
to arms.”
What I have termed “peaceful struggle” designates a relatively civi-
lized method, one that does not rely upon weaponry or armed might,
but takes from nature only what is necessary to meet one’s own needs.
The other method, as the term indicates, relies upon weapons and
military might, and looks upon the natural world as an enemy. This
might not be the most apt analogy, but it is like the methods used by the
bandits in the Chinese novel Shuihu zhuan or Water margin, who, if
goods or loot are not immediately handed over, resort to any sort of vio-
lence until they get what they want.
These, it seems to me, represent the two basic approaches used by
human beings in their relations with the natural world. And if we take a
broad view of the world and divide it into the Eastern and Western
spheres, we might say that the Eastern world has in general favored the
more peaceful approach, while the West has tended to resort to force in
order to conquer or subdue nature. Looking up the word “conquer” in
the Chinese-English dictionary, I see that the phrase “to conquer nature”
is given as one example of the usage of the word.
Ikeda: As you have just said, Professor Ji, traditional Chinese thought,
including that of both the Confucian and Taoist schools, takes a peace-
ful approach to the struggle with nature, one advocating harmonious
relations with the natural world. And this same emphasis upon harmo-
nious relations with nature is also characteristic of Buddhism, as exem-
plified in the concept of the “oneness of life and the environment” that I
mentioned earlier. The Eastern view of nature is characterized by
respect for the workings of nature and the maintenance of harmonious
relations with its ecosystems, a view founded on the principle of harmo-
ny and nonviolent coexistence.
In contrast to this, the West in recent centuries has adopted a militant
approach, one in which human beings stand in opposition to nature,
endeavoring to control and manipulate the ecosystems of the natural
world in order to fulfill their own wants and desires. And as a result,
desire in time is transformed into greed, and control gives way to a kind
of violent exploitation.
Many of the intellectual leaders with whom I have held dialogues
have expressed concern over these differences in their views of nature
that characterize the Eastern and Western worlds. Thus, for example, in
my discussions with Arnold Toynbee, when I had explained to him the
Buddhist concept of EshØ Funi or the “oneness of life and its environ-
ment,” he responded by stating, “I should like to see EshØ Funi adopted
all over the world as a religious belief involving a moral obligation.”
(Choose Life, p.42)
These differences in the Eastern and Western views of nature are
rooted in profound differences in the modes of thought of the two cul-
tures. I would like, therefore, in the next section of our talks, to take up
this topic of a comparison of the ways of thought in Eastern and West-
ern culture.
EASTERN CULTURE AND WESTERN CULTURE
Toward a Definition of Culture

Ikeda: In our last meeting we discussed the differences in their view of
nature that characterize the Eastern and Western worlds. This time, I
would like to turn the discussion to a comparison of the cultures of
these two areas.
Animals, we have agreed, carry out a type of activity that is deter-
mined by instinct. Human beings, on the other hand, decide what kind
of activity or activities they wish to engage in, and their decision is
based upon the subjective judgment of the individual. This freedom and
subjectivity of action, we may say, is a special characteristic of human

beings.
When human beings come to make their individual decisions regard-
ing action, they do so not on the basis of instinct. Rather, their actions
follow a system of modes of activity that they possess, which may be
termed “culture.”
Of course, human beings continue to possess certain aspects that
mark them as a species of animal. But through a long process of evolu-
tion, human beings have succeeded in vaulting to a higher plane of
development, one that differs from that of other animals, and once this
has been accomplished, we may say that the true human being is born.
Delight and anger, joy and sorrow—emotions such as these are pos-
sessed by animals and humans alike. But even the cleverest animal is
not capable of the type of activity that would allow it to reflect on its
own inner being and to endeavor to transcend its present self and create
a new self that is in some sense better. With such activity we enter the
realm of ethics, a term that we have discussed earlier.
Thus, I believe we may say that human beings clearly differ from ani-
mals, and that difference lies in the fact that the former possess “cul-
ture,” the factor that proves that they are indeed human beings.
But how do we define the word “culture”? Since the time of the
British cultural anthropologist Sir Edward Tylor, many different defini-
tions have been offered. Tylor himself states that “Culture or civilization
represents a composite system embracing various abilities and customs
that human beings as members of society have succeeded in acquiring,
including such elements as knowledge, religious belief, art, morality,
laws, customs, etc.”
As you will see by the way he refers to “culture or civilization,” Tylor
makes no basic distinction between these two concepts. But what is
your view regarding the term “culture,” Professor Ji?
Ji: They say that the various scholars of the world have advanced over
five hundred definitions of the word “culture.” If so, then it would seem
that it in fact has no definition. (Laughter)
My own understanding, shallow as it may be, is that culture is a kind
of excellence created by both the mental and the material aspects of
human beings.
Ikeda: That is a very apt way of putting it, one that penetrates to the
very essence of the term “culture.” Culture is indeed a composite entity
formed through the advancements created by human beings, one that
includes within it such elements as customs, laws, art, morality, science

and religion.
Jiang: Professor Ji’s definition of culture without doubt conveys in a

general way the essential nature of the concept. And I find myself on
the whole agreeing with the definition offered by Mr. Ikeda.
According to these definitions, I think we can say that culture repre-
sents the sum total of the mental and material assets produced by
human society. These assets have been created and stored up through
the unremitting labor and intellectual activity of the human race.
The Theory of Two Cradles of Culture
Ji: With regard to the question of the cradle of human, there are two
points of view. One holds that there was only one such cradle or place
of origination, the other that there were a number of such places.
The former view maintains that only one people among the various
peoples of the world served as the originator of culture, namely the
Nordic race or the people of northern Europe. None of the remaining
peoples of the world possessed any true culture, and in fact were the
destroyers of culture. This is the theory put forward by those who sub-
scribe to fascism, and, needless to say, is not one that we ourselves sub-
scribe to.
I support the view that there were a number of cradles of culture.
Whether large or small, every ethnic group in the world has created
some form of culture, and in this sense all are contributors to human
culture as a whole. Nevertheless, it is a historical fact that these various
cultures differ greatly both in nature and in geographical extent, some
of them having developed in almost complete isolation. Unless we rec-
ognize this fact, we can hardly pursue the question in a properly scien-
tific manner, one that seeks to learn the truth through examination of the
actual circumstances involved.
Ikeda: I too subscribe to the view that there are many cradles of cul-
ture. But it should be pointed out that, although few people would go so
far as to embrace the fascist view that there is only one such cradle of
culture, this whole question of the historical development of human cul-
ture or civilization is still very much influenced by Eurocentric modes
of thought. That is, the kind of historical outlook that focuses mainly
upon Europe, such as we see typically expressed in the writings of such
nineteenth century thinkers as Hegel, Ranke or Marx, has continued to
the present day to exercise a very strong influence.
This view of history derives from the fact that in the nineteenth cen-
tury Europe did in truth dominate the world as a whole, and this image
of oneself as “the center of the world” was then projected backward
over the history of the preceding two or three thousand years.
At the same time, there were also historians who were keen enough
to perceive the ways in which European culture had arrived at an
impasse, and to present ideas that challenged this Eurocentric view of
history. Among the most outstanding of these was Oswald Spengler,
who in the midst of World War One published the first volume of his
work Decline of the West, and Dr. Arnold Toynbee, author of the volu-
minous and highly influential A Study of History. Both of these works
opposed the view of culture as springing solely from Europe and
instead surveyed the development of humankind as a whole, describing
in a dynamic and multiviewed manner the process by which various
civilizations are born, reach a peak of development, and in time pass
away.
We may note in this connection that Spengler identified eight differ-
ent cultures that he believed had reached a high level of development,
while Toynbee recognized twenty-one or twenty-three such centers of
cultural development. More recently, Samuel P. Huntington, a professor
of Harvard, has defined seven or eight important civilizations, and in his
book entitled The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World
Order describes the way in which the world order is evolving in the
post-Cold War era.
Jiang: The author of The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of

World Order takes note of the fact that the civilizations of the East have
been undergoing a process of rapid development and sees in this the
possibility of dangerous confrontation with Western civilization. His
work in this sense is intended as a warning to Western society of the
potential dangers involved. Such fears, it seems to me, can be under-
stood as a kind of denial of the older Eurocentric view of history we
have been discussing.
The Growth of Society and Cultural Exchange
Ji: Ever since human beings first appeared, there has been some kind of
cultural exchange, we may suppose. One group of people discover a
new way of obtaining food, and other people learn it from them—this is
the process of cultural exchange. The example I have just given, of
course, represents the process at its simplest and most primitive level.
But as historical development advanced, human beings formed them-
selves in clan-based units or community groups, and cultural exchange

then took place among these various groups. And later on, we have the
formation of ethnic and national groups. Cultural exchange takes place
among these ethnic groups or nationalities, and in this way the process
of cultural exchange becomes ever larger in scale and richer in content.
Today we enjoy a type of cultural exchange that involves all the dif-
ferent nations of the world, each contributing to make up the gloriously
varied phenomena we call human culture. Through the process of cul-
tural exchange, the scope of human activities has become increasingly
enriched, and the life span of the individual has been lengthened. Cul-
tural exchange may indeed be the most important factor contributing to
the advancement of human society.
Ikeda: I agree fully with what you have just said about cultural
exchange. Since the beginning of human history, people have evolved
different kinds of cultures and these have exercised an influence on one
another. It would not be too much to say that no culture has ever
evolved without undergoing such outside influence in the fields of lan-
guage, music, art, architecture, and so forth.
When we come to consider the subject of cultural exchange between
the East and the West, the example that comes immediately to my mind
is that of the so-called Silk Road, a subject that you two gentlemen are
both specialists in. The Silk Road, which stretched across the Asian
continent, a vast network of main routes and feeder routs linking desert
oases and outposts in the steppe region, served not only for the trans-
portation and exchange of material goods, but for a rich process of cul-
tural exchange between East and West.
It was though the Silk Road that the Iranian and Scythian cultures
were disseminated and in time contributed greatly to world culture as a
whole. Buddhism, which originated in India, also spread throughout the
regions of Asia via the Silk Road, and other religions such as Christian-
ity and Islam which flourished in the vicinity of the Silk Road exercised
a vast influence upon the art, architecture and other facets of the differ-
ent cultures of the world.
The culture of Japan, a country that represents the eastern terminus of
the Silk Road, represents in a sense a fusion of the various cultures
introduced via that road from northern and southern Korea, China, and
the regions of southeast Asia.
Once so influential, the Silk Road later began to decline in impor-
tance around the eighth century. One reason for this decline was the fact
that the Saracen Empire had cut off the routes that had earlier connected
East and West. And at a somewhat later date, Mongol invasions of the
same area destroyed the oasis towns that had been important stopping
places on the Silk Road.
Some ten years ago, the Min-On Concert Association, which I found-
ed, sponsored a presentation entitled “A Silk Road Musical Journey” in
which musicians, singers and dancers from four countries, China, the
Soviet Union, Turkey and Japan, performed jointly, the group making
appearances all over Japan. At that time relations between China and
the Soviet Union were strained, and it was hardly conceivable that par-
ticipants from these four countries should appear together on the same
stage. And yet the performances took place, constituting a resounding
cheer for friendship and cultural interchange.
Today more than ever before, we need this kind of bringing together
of plain people, those who underlie the whole general area of culture, a
coming together that transcends boundaries of race, political systems or
ideology.
The Silk Road joined together the East and the West of the era in
which it flourished. And at that time the Buddhism that was centered in
the Gandhara region of India was absorbing influences from Greek cul-
ture of the West and was in the process of forming what we now know
as Mahayana Buddhism. The Silk Road in this sense might also be
called the Buddha Road.
The concepts of East and West in time underwent various historical
changes, but we may say in general that it was the Silk Road that made
possible cultural exchange between these two major areas, and in doing
so contributed greatly to the creation of human culture as a whole.
Jiang: Professor Ji made a very apt and important point when he

observed that cultural exchange has contributed greatly to the advance-
ment of human society. Professor Ji himself has in the past conducted
scientific research in a number of different fields of learning and in this
respect has become directly involved in questions of cultural inter-
change. And he has made important contributions to effects for greater
cultural exchange in matters pertaining to social practice. His conclu-
sions are thus based both theory and practice.
Mr. Ikeda too has a profound understanding of the meaning and
importance of cultural exchange. Up to the present he was consistently
taken part in activities designed to produce such exchange and, working
for the realization of world peace, has made outstanding contributions
that have won universal acclaim. And to the best of my knowledge, the
various organizations which he has founded, such as the Institute of
Oriental Philosophy, Soka University, the Tokyo Fuji Art Museum, and
the Min-ON Concert Association have also done admirable work in
helping in various ways to promote cultural exchange.
Basing ourselves on the penetrating assessments made by these two
gentlemen regarding the importance of cultural exchange, we may with
confidence state the following: the history of human advancement is in
effect the history of cultural exchange. To encourage cultural exchange
is thus to encourage the progress of human society. Conversely, any fac-
tor that hinders or opposes cultural exchange is one that hinders and
opposes the advancement of human society. And among such possible
factors, war is particularly baneful, since war not only impedes cultural
exchange but destroys culture itself. Hence to oppose war, working to
prevent war and maintain peace; and to encourage cultural exchange—
these two activities further one another and work toward a common
end.
The Formation of Cultural Systems
Ji: Cultures are created in different geographic areas by different ethnic
groups, but eventually these various cultures form themselves or are
brought together into relatively large scale cultural systems. Surveying
the scene from the beginnings of history down to the present, I would
say that human beings have formed themselves into four major cultural
systems. These are as follows: (1) the Chinese cultural system (includ-
ing Japanese culture, though this displays certain modifications of the
former). (2) The Indian cultural system. (3) The cultural systems of the
Semitic peoples of ancient Hebraic culture, Egypt, Babylon, Assyria,
and the Arab and Islamic cultures. (4) The cultural system of ancient
Greece and Rome and the culture of Europe and America as this has
evolved down to the present.
Jiang: Professor Ji in his lecture entitled “The Inevitability and Com-

plexity of Cultural Exchange” has defined three basic conditions that
must be met if we are to speak of a cultural system, namely, the culture
must display distinct characteristics, it must be capable of independent
existence, and it must exercise a major influence. Of the various cul-
tures of the world, only the four that have just been mentioned are capa-
ble of meeting these three conditions.
Ikeda: There are various ways of determining what constitutes a cultur-

al system or the creation of a distinct culture. But if we become too
engrossed in the details of these various arguments, I am afraid we may
lose sight of the basic question that we are addressing. In this sense, I
believe that the criteria that Professor Ji has suggested for defining a
cultural system cover the essentials of the problem. I would like to go
along with his view.
Ji: If we examine these four cultural systems that I have mentioned in

further detail, we see that they may be further classified into two large
categories, the first three falling under the general heading of Eastern
cultural systems, and the fourth labeled as the Western cultural system.
Synthetic Thought and Analytic Thought
Ikeda: I would like now to turn the discussion to a comparison of these
two types of cultural systems that Professor Ji has just mentioned, the
Eastern type and the Western type.
Ji: We might begin by pointing out the characteristics that these two
types have in common. Both of them aim to bring happiness to human
beings, to improve the quality of the human race, to provide people with
a better type of life, a higher level of existence, and to further the devel-
opment of human society.
Ikeda: There is no doubt that in Asia the east Asian cultural sphere cen-
tering about China and the southeast Asian cultural sphere centering on
India have contributed greatly to the material and spiritual advancement
of the various peoples of Asia. At the same time, the civilization of
modern day science that has developed in Europe from the seventeenth
century on has gradually extended its influence until it has now spread
throughout the entire world. There is no question but that this civiliza-
tion has contributed to the scientific advancement of the human race.
Ji: On the other hand, there are obviously many aspects in which these
two types of cultural systems differ. Most fundamental of all such dif-
ferences, it seems to me, is the type of thought process characteristic of
each. This, I believe, is the source and foundation of all the other differ-
ences that might be pointed out.
To state the matter in the simplest form, the Eastern cultural systems
are characterized by thought processes that may be termed synthetic or
integrating, while those characteristic of the western cultural system are
analytic. These two major types of cultural systems, that of the East and
that of the West, manifest only these two modes of thought; there is no
other mode in evidence. These two types of thinking underlie all human
thinking with regard to nature and human affairs alike.

In China the Yijing or Classic of Changes posits the two principles of
qian and kun or heaven and earth, which correspond to the forces of
yang and yin. In the natural world, there are the sun and moon, day and
night, while in the realm of religion, philosophy and ethics there are
light and darkness, good and evil.
Ikeda: You are quite right in characterizing the method of thinking typ-
ical of Eastern cultures as in general synthesizing in nature, while that
typical of Western culture is analytical in nature. However, there are
elements of analytical thinking to be found in the East, and of synthe-
sizing thought in the West. Since the beginning of the twentieth century,
synthetic type thought has become particularly prominent in the West.
However, if we consider the mainstream of development in the two
cultural spheres as it has progressed up to the present, I think Professor
Ji’s description is sound. These two types of thinking that are character-
istic of East and West manifest themselves in the various ways in which
these cultures view the natural world and human life and in their value
systems.
Jiang: It is easy enough to see that there are clear differences between
the cultural system of the east and that of the West. There are two basic
ways in which one may account for these differences.
One, the usual ways, is to make no attempt to deal with the crux of
the matter or the essential nature of these two cultural systems of East
and West, but merely to point out the ways in which they differ in their
politics, laws, systems of philosophy, ethics, educational methods, sci-
ence, arts, psychology, manners and customs.
A second way, that which endeavors to get at the heart of the ques-
tion, is to try to define the more fundamental difference or differences
that mark these two cultural systems. This is surely the better of the two
methods, but one that presents great difficulties and has seldom been
tried in the past. Professor Ji, however, using this very method, through
his careful research and deliberations, has come up with a new approach
to the question, and one that seems to me to lead to a correct conclu-
sion.
Using Professor Ji’s reasoning as my guide, I would therefore state
the matter in the following manner. Culture is created by human beings.
Why do they create culture? Because they possess a cerebrum, and the
function of a cerebrum is to think. And the function of thinking is to
exercise a control mechanism (that is, control of both mental and physi-
cal activities). The mode or model of the thinking process thus deter-
mines the mode of behavior. And the function of behavioral activity is
to create culture (both mental and material culture). Therefore the mode
of behavior will determine the characteristics of the particular culture
that is thereby created.
For this reason, the fundamental differences that exist between one
culture and another, and in particular, between these two cultural sys-
tems of East and West, are of necessity reflections of differences in their
modes of thought. Thus, if we can understand the differences in modes
of thought that underlie them, we can then understand these basic dif-
ferences that exist in the two cultural system of East and West.
Characteristics of Analytical Thinking
Ji: The distinct characteristic of analytical thinking is that it approaches
a given substance and proceeds to break it down into smaller and small-
er components until it reaches the smallest possible component, the so-
called elementary particle. But is it possible to continue this process any
further and arrive at some even smaller division? Here the opinions in
both the scientific world and the world of philosophy are divided. Some
favor of the view that matter can be divided to an unlimited degree, oth-
ers that there is a limit to such possibilities.
This mode of thinking, the analytical mode, is what is known in pop-
ular terminology as being “unable to see the forest for the trees.” In the
field of medicine, it means that if the patient has a pain in his head, you
simply treat the pain in his head, and if he has a pain in his foot, you
simply treat the pain in his foot.
Jiang: Whether or not matter can be infinitely divided—this is a major

question in both the world of science and in that of philosophy.
I remember in the early 60’s reading in the paper that Chairman Mao
Zedong and a Japanese physicist were debating this question. The con-
clusion they reached was that there is no limit to the degree to which
matter may be divided. One of the arguments they used to support their
conclusion was statement found in the last chapter of the Zhuangzi that
reads: “Take a pole one foot long, cut away half of it every day, and at
the end of ten thousand generations there will still be some left.”
Several years ago, Professor Ji pointed out the correct view of the
matter when he commented in the following fashion: “This statement of
Zhuangzi is correct. Why? Because he is speaking in terms of a mathe-
matical concept. But the question of whether matter can be infinitely
divided is one that concerns physics. One must not confuse the two con-
cepts. Therefore, it is not correct to cite the statement by Zhuangzi in

order to prove that matter can be infinitely divided.”
Also, as I recall, the Chinese Buddhist pilgrim Xuanzang, in chapter
two of his Records of the Western Regions, mentions the smallest unit in
the Indian system of measurements, the “finest dust particle,” and says,
“ This unit cannot be further divided, for if it were, it would lead to
nothingness. Hence it is called a jiwei or atom.”
From this passage we can see that in the ancient Indian system of
measurements, this question was in fact considered from the standpoint
of physics, and the people of India at that time held that matter could
not be infinitely divided.
Buddhist Criticism of the Atomist Theory
Ikeda: In India the various schools of thought were divided on this
question. You have just mentioned the term jiwei or atom. The Sanscrit
word for atom is paramånu. One school of Indian thought, the
Vaiseßika school, held that all existence is made up of such paramånu
or atoms.
Buddhism, however, criticized this theory. Thus the famous Twenty
Verses on Consciousness Only of Vasubandhu argues that the individual
atom touches the other atoms around and above and below it in six
places. If, as the atomists argue, the atom cannot be broken down into
any smaller unit, then it cannot have any part or section that touches the
nearby atoms. But the fact that it does in fact touch the other atoms is
proof that it has a surface or section that does so, that is, that it can be
broken down into parts smaller than the whole. This is the argument
used by the Buddhists in refuting the atomist school of thinking.
In modern physics, as you know, matter is broken down into atoms,
and atoms are further broken down into atomic nuclei and electrons,
and the nuclei are further broken down into protons and neutrons. And
since the 1970’s, these elementary particles, the proton and the neutron,
have been shown to be made up of even smaller basic particles known
as quarks.
Are the quarks in fact the smallest particle or unit of matter that can
be identified, or is there some even smaller particle? This study of the
elementary particles is directly related to the so-called big bang theory,
that is, the question of how the present universe came into being and
how it has evolved.
I had an opportunity to discuss these themes with Dr. Anatoli A.
Logunov, the president of Moscow University, who is a world-
renowned physicist. At that time he expressed great interest in the wis-

dom of the Buddhist teachings as expressed in the doctrines of depen-
dent origination and the three truths. The study of physics and the
nature of matter must go hand in hand with the study of human powers
of thought itself.
Jiang: Discussions of these questions will no doubt continue for a long

time. After all, there are limits to what can be determined by the meth-
ods of scientific experiment, and limits to how far scientific experiment
can go in contributing to the solution of these questions.
Though I am no expert in such affairs, it seems to me that when we
use a term such as “basic particle,” we are already in a way recognizing
the fact that it cannot be divided into any smaller entity. An elementary
particle of matter that is capable of further division cannot be called a
“basic particle.” And any theory that claims that matter is capable of
infinite division must therefore in fact deny the existence of any such
“basic particle.” If we admit that the term “basic Particle” means that it
is incapable of further division, then there is no possibility of arguing
that matter can be divided infinitely.
Ikeda: The analytical reasoning methods of Western culture have

brought about the rapid strides of modern science, particularly in the
field of physics. And we have already noted how these are reflected in
the way in which Western culture views the natural world. But we have
reached a point where human beings have not only come to dominate
the natural world, but are in danger of actually destroying it.
And the methods of analytical thinking have been applied to the
Western view of life itself, so that Western medicine in modern times
has come to regard mind and body as separate entities, and to place
greater emphasis upon the latter than on the former. As a result, the
human body is regarded as a piece of machinery, and the phenomena
associated with human life are explained in terms of their electronic or
chemical aspects, life being viewed as no more than the sum of its com-
ponents. Such methods of modern Western medicine represent a type of
progress, to be sure, but at the same time their limitations have become
apparent. They tend to focus attention upon a particular organ of the
body while failing to consider the condition of the body as a whole. As
Processor Ji pointed out earlier, the trouble with such an approach is
that it tends to see only the disease, and to forget about the person who
is suffering from the disease.
Characteristics of Synthetic Thinking

Ji: Two concepts may be pointed out as representative of synthetic
thinking, that of the aggregate or the entity as a whole, and that of uni-
versal relationships. In ordinary parlance, it means to look at the trees
and in that way see the forest. And when applied to medical science, it
may mean that when there is a pain in the head, one treats the foot, or
vice versa.
Ikeda: Traditional Chinese medicine has always been distinguished by

the fact that it takes into consideration the total life condition of the ail-
ing individual.
Jiang: Just as you say, traditional Chinese medicine has always placed
equal emphasis upon both the mind and the body, the physical condition
of the patient and the patient’s mental or psychological condition. True
health must be based on both of these, or, as the saying is, “If you
would cure the body, then first cure the mind.” This is the characteristic
approach of traditional Chinese medicine.
Ji: I have mentioned earlier the concept in ancient China of “Heaven

and humankind merged into one.” This idea of the oneness of the natur-
al and the human worlds is typical of the mode of thought that charac-
terizes Eastern culture. And we find the same idea expressed in the phi-
losophy and religion of ancient India, as we see in the expression “Tat
tram asi” or “You are it.”
In Indian Buddhism, we find a great deal of breaking down of certain
concepts or entities into the various elements or component parts that
make them up, giving a name to each of the elements. This resembles
the kind of analytical thinking we have been talking about, but in fact it
is completely different from the analytical thinking of Western culture.
Ikeda: The Indologists B. K. Matilal has suggested that we might view

Indian philosophy and Indian Buddhism as comparable to our present
day structuralist thought or deconstructionist theory. We can see the
same kind of thinking, for example, in the writings of Michel Foucault
or Jacques Derrida and in those of the ancient Indian Buddhist philoso-
pher Nagarjuna.
Professor Ji has referred to the analysis of the components of an enti-
ty, or myØsØ that is a characteristic of Indian Buddhist thought. The
term myØsØ, corresponds to the Sanscrit words nåma and samsthana, or

what we would call in present day language the elements of name and
form. In the various schools of Buddhist logic such as the Mådhyamika
school, the Consciousness-only school, or the Dignaga school, these
elements of name and form were very extensively studied and analyzed.
But these studies and analyses did not support the view that name and
form actually exist. In the end these thinkers concluded that name and
form have no real existence.
Why did their inquiries lead them to this conclusion? To understand
this, we must realize that they were pitted in debate against a rival
school of thought, the Sarvåstivadin or Existence school, which held
that all the objects of consciousness actually exist, and therefore what is
designated as name and form must likewise exist. The Mådhyamika and
other schools of thought I have just mentioned, arguing against this
view of the Sarvåstivadins, held that in the final analysis both name and
form are in substance empty or void, nothing more than delusions that
are conjured up by our empty and illusory faculties of discrimination.
For example, no such thing as a “Japanese person” exists. All that we
see here is simply a person and nothing more. But we impose upon that
person the arbitrary categories of “Japanese” or “foreigner.” These are
the products of our empty and illusory discriminations. In other words,
the elements of name and form are empty in nature. This is the theory
arrived at by the Madhyamika and the other schools as a result of their
analyses of phenomena, which are in fact in a constant and unending
process of change and transformation. This was their answer to the doc-
trines of the Sarvastivada school of India, which held that the myriad
phenomena had actual and incontrovertible existence or reality.
The Zeyang or twenty-fifth chapter of the Zhuangzi states: “The Way
cannot be thought of as being, nor can it be thought of as nonbeing. In
calling it the Way we are only adopting a temporary expedient. ‘Noth-
ing does it,’ ‘something makes it like this’—these occupy a mere corner
of the realm of things. What connection could they have with the Great
Way [of Heaven and Earth]?”
Zhuangzi abandons any attempt to adopt a fixed view regarding phe-
nomena, which are in an unending process of change, and, by recogniz-
ing this reality of their ever-changing nature, he gives expression to
their unchanging essence or innate being. The view of Buddhism,
which does not attempt any definitive analysis of name and form, but
sees the nature of reality as “empty,” and the Chinese view of “Heaven
and humankind as one” are basically the same, are they not?
From West to East

Ji: At present the world is dominated by Western culture. This is a
fact—no one can deny it. But this is only a temporary phenomenon.
Westerners look with contempt on Eastern culture, an attitude that is in
fact based on racial prejudice.
But for Eastern peoples, particularly Chinese, to regard Eastern cul-
tural with contempt is the height of foolishness. One can hardly expect
to come to a true understanding of the situation unless one surveys it
fairly and in its true dimensions.
Jiang: This is a very important point you have raised, Professor Ji. The
situation you refer to, in which Western culture has come to dominate
the world, only took shape gradually, beginning in the sixteenth century.
It has continued now for some five hundred years, but in terms of the
overall history of human culture and of the centuries that lie ahead, five
hundred years is a very short period of time.
So far as I am aware, until very recently in the West traditional Chi-
nese medicine was not even accorded legal recondition as an acceptable
form of medical treatment. But now it is recognized in the West as a
perfectly legitimate alternative form of treatment, and in fact has
become quite popular. As a result, the number of Western students who
come to China in order to study traditional Chinese medicine has shown
a marked increase. I believe this is a phenomenon that deserves to be
carefully noted and taken into consideration.
Ikeda: Even if we did not have Toynbee’s predictions to draw our atten-
tion to the situation, the defects and limitations of the analytical think-
ing of Western culture are now becoming clear to us all—we see evi-
dence of them in many fields, ranging from the understanding of nature
and life itself to matters pertaining to politics, economics, and educa-
tion.
As Professor Ji has pointed out, when seen in terms of the entire his-
tory of the development of human culture and in a global perspective,
the dominance of modern Western culture at the present time is no more
than a temporary phenomenon. But I like to turn our discussion here to
a consideration of the future development of humankind, to ask what
part will be played in it by the kind of synthetic mode of thought we
have noted as characteristic of Eastern culture, and of how that will con-
tribute to the future of the human race.
Before we do so, however, we might examine in somewhat greater
detail the concept of “Heaven and humankind as one,” which represents

a sort of crystallization of Eastern thought. And after we have consid-
ered somewhat further the teachings of the Lotus Sutra and the Bud-
dhist view of truth, we might return to a discussion of how these ideas
have affected the historical development of culture in the Eastern and
Western spheres, and how they may bring about transitions in the fore-
seeable future of humankind.
THE ESSENCE OF EASTERN CULTURE:

“HEAVEN AND HUMANKIND AS ONE” AND
“ONENESS OF LIFE AND ENVIRONMENT”
China’s Role in World Peace

Ikeda: Each year, on January 26th, which marks the founding of Soka
Gakkai International (SGI), I stress the occasion by putting forward a
proposal that I hope will contribute to the future of humankind. This
year, which marks our entry into the twenty-first century, I offered a
proposal entitled “Creating and Sustaining A Century of Life.”
This year I focused in particular on China, quoting the words of Pro-
fessor Arnold Toynbee, who in his dialogues with me said, “Perhaps it
is China’s destiny now to give political unity and peace not just to half
but to all the world.” (Choose Life, p. 251)
Ji: In my opinion, Dr. Toynbee showed keen foresight in expressing

such hopes and expectations for China. And you, Mr. Ikeda, have
demonstrated a deep understanding of Dr. Toynbee’s thinking in this
matter. I wholly approve of the ideas expressed.
Jiang: Choose Life, the record of the dialogues held between Dr. Toyn-
bee and you, Mr. Ikeda, is a most rewarding book. I feel I have learned
a great deal from it. And as you point out in your preface to the Chinese
language translation of the book, there are very few scholars in the West
who have expressed the kind of expectations for China’s role in the fur-
thering of world peace that Dr. Toynbee did.
Sometime later, Professor Ji excerpted the sections of Choose Life
that deal with East Asia’s role in the achievement of world peace and,
under the title “Dr. Toynbee’s Expectations for China,” included them in
the first volume of his Collected Discussions on Eastern and Western
Culture. This is evidence of how important Professor Ji regards the
ideas expressed by Mr. Ikeda and Dr. Toynbee on this subject. Today
Choose Life has become one of the most widely read works in China
and has attracted considerable attention in academic circles. One comes
across frequent quotations from or references to it in Chinese scholarly
journals, which is evidence of the wide influence it has had.
Ikeda: Thank you for saying so. It was 1974 when my wishes were ful-
filled and I was able to make my first visit to China. It was the year after
I had completed my discussions with Dr. Toynbee in London. There-
after I took the lead in opening up friendly exchanges between China
and Japan on the nongovernment level, particularly in the fields of cul-
tural and educational exchange.
Jiang: During the last two or three years, the Chinese television stations
have featured two large-scale documentary programs. One was
designed to commemorate the hundredth anniversary of the birth of Pre-
mier Zhou Enlai. The other was devoted to a review of China’s foreign
relations over the past fifty years. Mr. Ikeda appeared on both of these
programs and was interviewed by the commentators, at which time he
gave expression to his deep and lasting feelings of friendship toward the
Chinese people.
As a result, there is no one in China who is unaware of what an
important role you have exercised as an ambassador of goodwill on the
nongovernment level, working to promote friendly relations between
the two countries of China and Japan. Your contributions in this field
are highly respected and applauded by all.
In December of 1974 why did Premier Zhou Enlai, sick as he was at
the time, make arrangements to meet you at the hospital where he was
undergoing treatment? It is not difficult to guess the reason. He had for
long had an understanding of what kind of person you are. He judged, I
have no doubt, that in the years to come, you would be an important and
trustworthy Japanese friend, one who would devote himself to realizing
the lofty goal of “unfailing friendship between the Chinese and Japan-
ese people for generations to come.”
Ikeda: I will always remember the words Premier Zhou spoke at that
time and his imposing figure when, in spite of his grave condition, he
kindly granted me an interview.
Jiang: As the proverb has it, “When the road is long, you know how
much your horse can do; when the days are long you can see a person’s
true heart.” Twenty-five years have gone by since Premier Zhou passed
away. And as these twenty-five years can amply testify, you, Mr. Ikeda,
have put forth your utmost effort in order to encourage friendly rela-
tions between China and Japan. I am filled, with sincere respect for
what you have done.
And I have come to have a deeper understanding of why you exert
yourself in this manner to further the cause of Chinese and Japanese
friendship. It is because, as you have shown, you have a correct appreci-
ation of Chinese history and of present day conditions in China, and
you know how to speak out persuasively on these matters. I have deep
respect for these qualities as well.
The Spiritual Heritage of Chinese Civilization
Ikeda: In the cultural contacts I have enjoyed with you two gentlemen
and with many other citizens of China, there is one thing that has
always strongly impressed me. It is the striking way in which what Dr.
Toynbee used to refer to as the numerous merits or ideals of the spiritu-
al heritage of Chinese civilization, surviving the dramatic vicissitudes
of historical and societal change, undergoing certain modifications in
form, have yet continued to manifest themselves.
One of these is the concept of an ethos, of symbiosis, as symbolized
in the phrase datong or “great unity.”
Ji: I would think that, now that the human race is entering the twenty-
first century, it is time that it showed a little common sense but that does
not appear to be the case.
The West continues, as in the past, its efforts to “conquer nature.”
And this in spite of the fact that the “conquest” is leading to all kinds of
deleterious results such as the greenhouse effect, the destruction of the
ozone layer, global warming, melting of the glaciers, destruction of eco-
logical systems, and the outbreak of new diseases.
If humanity is to continue to survive not only now but in the years to
come, those persons who are representative of the West must waken to
and take responsibility for the grave errors they have committed in the
past and must learn to live in a state of harmony and friendliness with
the natural world. They must cease their reckless efforts to “conquer”
nature!
Ikeda: The ideal of an ethos of symbiosis, one that represents a dynam-

ic spirit of harmony and peaceful coexistence, is summed up, is it not,
in the theme we are discussing today, the essence of Chinese thought as
expressed in the phrase “Heaven and humanity as one.”
Ji: The Eastern ideal of “Heaven and humanity as one” is reflected in

the famous “Western inscription” of the Northern Song Confucian
philosopher Zhang Zai when he states that “All people are my brothers
and sisters, and all things are my companions. Only by practicing this
spirit of humanity can we hope to save the human race from destruc-
tion. Otherwise, the natural world will only retaliate in even stronger
fashion, until the whole future of the human race is in peril.
Ikeda: The concept of “Heaven and humanity as one” expresses the

idea that Heaven’s way and the way of human beings are essentially one
in nature, and that human beings in their mind and inner nature are
endowed with the same essential nature and virtues as those possessed
by Heaven. This is the basis upon which the concept of the nature of
human beings and of the universe in Chinese thought are founded.
In Buddhism the relationship between the universe or the natural
world and human life has been developed and expressed in terms of the
phrase EshØ Funi or “the oneness of life and its environment.” EhØ,
which represents the environment, and shØhØ, which represents the
human life force, are basically Funi or “not two” in nature. From this
then arises the interrelatedness that characterizes the phenomenal world,
an interrelatedness that in its manifestation is nini or “two” in nature.
Thus the relationship in its full form is characterized as “not two but
two.”
That is, the two phenomena, life and environment, are different in
expression, but the essential relationship of human beings and the natur-
al world is that of oneness. In essence, the principle is the same as that
expressed in the phrase “Heaven and humankind as one.”
I would like in our discussions now to focus upon this concept of
“Heaven and humanity as one” which typifies Chinese thought, and the
Buddhist concept of “the oneness of life and its environment,” and in
this way attempt to throw light upon the essence of Eastern thought.
Ji: Needless to say, the concept embodied in the phrase “Heaven and
humankind merged as one” represents a very important thesis in the his-
tory of Chinese philosophy. That said, however, one must note that
scholars differ considerably in the way they understand, interpret and
explain this phrase “Heaven and humankind as one.” They are not nec-
essarily alike in the depth, breadth, or angle from which they view it. Of
course, it is quite natural that they should not be in total agreement in
the manner in which they interpret such an important thesis in the histo-
ry of philosophy.
The Spirit behind “Heaven and Humankind As One”:

A World View Common to Humanity
Ikeda: In that case, let’s proceed by examining this phrase “Heaven and
humankind merged as one.“
Ji: The word ren or “humankind” is easy enough to understand. It

refers to all of us, ordinary living human beings.
The word tian or “Heaven” is somewhat more difficult. Among tradi-
tional Chinese philosophers there have in the past been those who inter-
preted the word tian to mean a deity possessing a will. But such
thinkers have been very rare. There are others who take “Heaven” to
mean a substance that stands in contrast or opposition to “earth” and
represents Nature that is possessed of intellect and will. Most Chinese
thinkers in the past, however, while employing the word tian, have done
so in ways that are at times self-contradictory or that create conflicts
between one part of their argument and another.
In the remainder of the phrase, the words heyi or “merged as one,”
the word he or “merged” indicates that the previously named entities,
Heaven and humankind, are in a relationship of mutual understanding,
are bound together in friendship, and are not antagonistic toward one
another.
Ikeda: Just as you have indicated, the word tian has been used by the
Chinese to refer to a number of slightly different concepts, and its
meaning has undergone certain changes over time. I think we can point
out three principle meanings in which the word has been used, namely,
“Heaven as a presiding power,” “Heaven as Nature,” and “Heaven as the
principle of justice.” The first indicates Heaven seen as the object of
devotion; the second, Heaven as a term for the natural environment; and
the third, Heaven as a kind of principle or natural law underlying all the
myriad phenomena of the world.
Ji: So that readers will be better able to follow our argument, I would
like here, as I have indicated earlier, to take the term “Heaven” as refer-
ring in general to Nature or the natural world. I am sure this meaning is
not that far removed from the concept of truth.
Ikeda: In the concept of EshØ Funi or “the oneness of life and its envi-
ronment,” the term ehØ, which refers to the environment, has the mean-
ing of “the universe” or “the world of nature.” Dr. Toynbee, speaking of
this concept of EshØ Funi, remarked to me that it would be quite under-

standable to any Westerner who was acquainted with the Greek and
Roman literature of the pre-Christian era. That is because it is similar to
the world view that prevailed in ancient Greco-Roman culture. And this
view seems to have originally been common to humanity as a whole.
Jiang: I have from past times been influenced and enlightened by Pro-
fessor Ji’s views on this matter. He has long been concerned with this
question of the relationship between human beings and nature, reading
widely on the subject, considering the various opinions of others, and
struggling for a deeper understanding with regard to certain aspects of
the problem. And my own opinions have been formed on the basis of
his.
As to the concept expressed in the phrase “Heaven and humankind
merged as one,” Professor Ji believes that the full implications embod-
ied in the word tian or “Heaven” can be understood by equating it with
the word daziran or “the world of nature,” a term that anyone can com-
prehend. The phrase “Heaven and humankind merged as one” thus
expresses the idea that human beings and nature constitute a single enti-
ty, and that one must not try to separate the two. And he assigns the
highest level of importance to this concept.
I believe that this represents the correct interpretation of the phrase, a
new interpretation that is of great significance. This is because it not
only has a basis in scientific principles and fully accords with such prin-
ciples, but because in actual practice it offers important new implica-
tions as to how to overcome the problems of our times.
Ji: At this point I would like to cite a type of thinking that is analogous
to that expressed in the concept of the Han Chinese people that we have
been discussing, that of the oneness of “Heaven and humankind.” It is
drawn from the philosophical beliefs of the Nashi people, one of the
racial minorities of the People’s Republic of China.
I have little acquaintance with the philosophical ideas of these minor-
ity peoples, and I would not attempt to discourse at length on the sub-
ject. But I wish to quote a passage from a book sent to me by a friend in
Yunnan Province entitled The Culture of the Eastern Ba Region and
Nashi Philosophy.
“As to the Tiger that is the great earth, the Tiger’s head was given to
it by Heaven, the Tiger’s skin was given to it by the great earth. The
Tiger’s bones were given to it by the stones, the Tiger’s flesh, by the
soil, the Tiger’s eyes, by the stars, the Tiger’s stomach, by the moon...
I do not think the passage needs any explanation—it is permeated

with the spirit of the oneness of Heaven and earth and all the ten thou-
sand things. And we may surmise that this same type of thinking
regarding the oneness of “Heaven and humankind” can surely be found
in the ideas of the other minority peoples as well.
The Formation of the EshØ Funi Concept
Ikeda: Of course, in the period prior to the industrial revolution, though
one may speak of the two entities, nature and humankind, the effect that
human beings exercised upon the natural world was very limited. Par-
ticularly in the several thousand years during which human beings were
engaged chiefly in farming or animal herding activities, the forces of
nature exercised a life-and-death power over humankind.
It is only very recently in the history of the human race that people
have actually begun to change the natural world. The period during
which human beings feared and respected nature and looked upon
nature and humankind as a single and inseparable entity is by far the
longer one. During that long period it was only natural for all ethnic or
community groups whatsoever to adopt the view that human beings and
nature are one.
But after the appearance of Judaic monotheism, the Western world
began to make a clear distinction between humanity and nature, and a
type of thinking developed that sought to objectify and dominate the
natural world. That type of thinking, of course, formed the basis for the
development of modern science and civilization. In China and India, on
the other hand, the older conception of nature and humankind as consti-
tuting a single entity continued to hold sway and was formulated in
rationalized terms.
Jiang: To support what Mr. Ikeda has just been saying, I would like to
cite here the opinion of the late Dr. Zhang Guangzhi (1931–2001) a
well-known archaeologist and professor of Harvard University. He
writes: “If we examine the history of Western culture, we find that it can
be traced back to the Sumerian civilization that arose in the area
between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers some time before the third or
fourth century BCE. We cannot say for certain just what view of the
universe or what type of social system characterized this civilization in
the period before it developed written records, but it was presumably
not very different from the civilization and culture of Eastern Asia that
was developing at the same time. In the period of the Sumerian civiliza-
tion, or perhaps a little bit earlier, however, the history of this area
between the two major rivers underwent a process of revolutionary

advance.
“This advance vitally affected the relationship between human soci-
ety and the natural world. There were two important elements that con-
tributed to the form of this advance. One of these was a revolution in
the techniques of production, namely, the introduction of metal tools,
which made possible the carrying out of large scale irrigation projects.
This meant that without depending upon any measures taken by the
government, the rate of productivity could be increased through techno-
logical improvements and large amounts of wealth could be acquired.
“The second element involved was the development of large scale
activities for the transport and exchange of the raw materials of produc-
tion, which led to the establishment of a network of relations among the
various local cultures of the region. Because of these relations, a partic-
ular region was no longer limited to the natural resources native to that
region. Thus, for the first time in human history, people were freed from
the limitations in resources posed by their particular region.
“In response to these changes, in the Sumerian view of the universe
there now appeared various deities who existed outside the realm of
human beings and possessed creative powers. And as a result, temples
and palaces dedicated to these deities became a part of the social system
of the culture.” (Zhang Guangzhi, Kaogu renleixue suibi, Beijing 1999,
pp. 56–57.)
I would like at this point to sum up the main points of Professor
Zhang’s argument.
(1) From earliest times until around the third or fourth century BCE,
the view of the universe held by human beings as a whole regarded
human society and the natural world as inseparably related to one
another, a relationship of ultimate unity or oneness.
(2) This view of the universe continued to prevail in many areas of
the world such as China, India and Japan down to fairly recent times. It
finds concrete expression in such phrases as “Heaven and humankind as
one,” “the oneness of life and its environment,” or “the Brahman and
the Self are one.”
(3) Six or seven thousand years ago, because of a sudden change in
the mode of production among the people of Summer, a new view of
the universe took form, one that regarded human beings as separate
from nature as whole, and this view gave rise to the concept of conquer-
ing nature or the universe that is seen in Western civilization. This view
has been the basic principle governing the development of Western civi-
lization and continues to be so at the present time.
With regard to the phrase “Heaven and humankind as one,” Dr.

Zhang, in an article published in 1990 and entitled “The View of the
Universe Expressed in ‘Heaven and Humankind As One’ and the Mod-
ernization of China,” states as follows: “The traditional Chinese concept
expressed in the phrase ‘Heaven and humankind as one’ is based upon
the belief that a harmonious relationship exists between human beings
and nature, and is in conformity with the activities of traditional Chi-
nese culture. These activities find expression in the areas of agriculture,
architecture, medicine, animal-raising, cooking, disposal of waste, and
in various other facets of material life. But this concept differs from that
found in the West.”
Dr. Zhang also states: “This concept of ‘Heaven and humankind as
one’ has been regarded as a truism of human culture in many areas of
the world. And it is therefore only right that it should now be once more
elevated to that position.” And he says, “If this concept of ‘Heaven and
humankind as one’ can once more be elevated to that position, it will
contribute greatly to the welfare of all humanity.” (op. cit., pp. 49–51)
In any event, the views of Dr. Zhang, as expressed in these quotations
and in other passages that I have not quoted, offers substantial evidence
to support the view already stated by Professor Ji and Mr. Ikeda, name-
ly, that the modes of thinking and views of the universe held by the two
great cultural areas of East and West are clearly in opposition to one
another.
Ji: The origin of this concept of “Heaven and humankind as one” is

said by many scholars to be found in the thinking of the so-called Zisi-
Mencius branch of the Confucian school of the Warring States period,
but I believe this is too narrow an interpretation. The Zhonghua sixiang
dacidian, a dictionary of Chinese thought, defines the phrase “Heaven
and humankind as one” as “The keynote of the philosophy of ancient
China, stressing the harmonious relationship between Heaven and
human beings.” This seems to me to be a relatively broad definition that
fits well with the facts.
Ikeda: As a believer in Buddhism, what interests me is what sort of

influence the concept that you have described as “the keynote of the
philosophy of ancient China” had upon Buddhism when that was intro-
duced to China from India. After Buddhism had been introduced to
China, we find that a new view of nature and life has taken shape, one
declaring that all living beings possess the Buddha nature, and that
mountains, rivers, plants and trees can all become Buddhas.
In India, it had been understood that living beings are capable of

attaining emancipation, but that trees and plants belong to a different
category. In Chinese Buddhism, however, plants and trees are regarded
as possessing the Buddha nature in the same way as human beings and
other kinds of living beings, and it thus becomes possible for them to
attain Buddhahood. In other words, the possibility of attaining Buddha-
hood has been extended so that it includes both human beings and the
natural environment as well.
Buddhism, we may say, has taken over the older traditional belief of
Chinese culture and brought it to completion in this view of nature that
recognizes the dignity not only of human beings but of all kinds of liv-
ing beings and ecosystems. Nature, which includes all such ecosystems,
is in this theory designated as ehØ, and human beings are designated as
shØhØ, and the statement is then made that EshØ Funi or “life and its
environment are one.”
The Concept of “Heaven and Humankind As One”
in Confucian Thought
Jiang: The late Jin Yuehlin, one of the most renowned philosophers of
modern China, in his work entitled Chinese Philosophy, states as fol-
lows: “Many persons who are experts in Chinese philosophy cite the
concept of ‘Heaven and humankind as one’ as expressing the most out-
standing characteristic of that philosophy. In this phrase, the word tian
or ‘Heaven’ is vague in meaning. The harder one endeavors to pin down
its meaning, the more it seems to slip through one’s fingers. “The word
tian here is not being used in the meaning that is most commonly
intended by the word in ordinary everyday conversation. But if we
understand tian here to mean ‘nature’ or ‘a nature deity,’ at times with
emphasis on the former, at times with emphasis on the latter, we will
probably come close to grasping the meaning of this word in Chinese.
“This phrase ‘Heaven and humankind as one” without doubt repre-
sents a concept embracing all things whatsoever. Taken in its loftiest
and widest meaning, the phrase ‘Heaven and humankind as one’ indi-
cates a state in which the subjective is fused with the objective, the
objective with the subjective, the two firmly united in a basically uni-
form nature, one in which all visible distinctions are wiped away and
the individual and the universe constitute a nondual entity.” (Dongxi
wenhua yilunji, vol.1, Beijing.)
This interpretation of Jin Yuehlin seems to me to represent a very
profound and important insight. According to his view, the philosophy
implied in the concepts of “Heaven and humankind as one” and “life
and its environment as one” imply that the relationship between subject
and object is basically one of identity. In the language of philosophy,
this is referred to as the identity of subject and object.
Ji: I would like here to quote some concrete examples of Confucian

thought. In the Classic of Changes, under the first hexagram, qian, we
find this description of the “great man”: “The great man is one whose
virtue accords with that of Heaven and earth, whose brightness accords
with that of the sun and moon, whose ordering accords with that of the
four seasons, whose bestowal of good or bad fortune accords with that
of the gods and spirits. When he acts in advance of Heaven, Heaven
does not gainsay him. And when he acts after receiving Heaven’s
decrees, he honors the seasons of Heaven.”
The expression of the concept of “Heaven and humankind as one”
embodied in this passage represents the highest ideal of human life.
The view of tian or Heaven expressed by Confucius involves certain
contradictions. At times he seems to take tian to mean Nature, as when
he notes that, although Heaven does not speak, the four seasons proceed
in order and all the ten thousand creatures carry out their lives. At other
times he appears to regard Heaven as something that determines human
life or death and whether a person becomes rich and eminent or not. But
he does not conceive of Heaven as a personalized deity who possesses a
will.
Ikeda: I presume you are referring to the passage in the Analects in

which Confucius says: “Does Heaven speak? The four seasons follow
their course, and the hundred creatures are born. What speaking does
Heaven do?” (17:19)
Heaven does not say anything, and yet spring, summer, fall and win-
ter invariably follow one another, and all the myriad things in the world,
including living creatures, have their existence. All these things repre-
sent the wonderful workings of Heaven. And yet Heaven itself never
speaks so much as a word.
As we can see from this, Confucius’ conception of Heaven has
already moved from one emphasizing its personalized characteristics to
one that sees it in terms of a law of Nature.
The Chinese veneration of Heaven has been seen as deriving from
nature worship or worship of the ancestors, or from the supposed pas-
toral origins of the Chinese people. But there is no doubt that in its orig-
inal form, it involved some kind of personalized deity such as we find
associated with animism. In time, however, these personalized charac-
teristics were gradually shed, and it came to be viewed as a law or prin-

ciple, one that governs the cycles of the natural world and the origin,
continuation, and extinguishing of life. This process of development
found its final expression in the philosophy of the Song dynasty Confu-
cian thinker Zhu Xi, who defined Heaven as li or principle, and whose
thought is consequently known as lixue or The Study of Principle.
Ji: The Confucian text known as the Zhongyong or The Mean, describ-
ing a person of perfect sincerity, says: “Being able to give full develop-
ment to his nature, he is able to give full development to the nature of
other human beings and, being able to give full development to the
nature of other human beings, he is able to give full development to the
nature of other living beings. Being able to give full development to the
nature of other living beings, he can assist in the transforming and nour-
ishing power of Heaven and Earth.”
The views of Mencius regarding Heaven and humankind basically
follow the same line of thinking as that of The Mean, which represents
the philosophy of Zisi, the grandson of Confucius, who is regarded as
the author of The Mean.
In the fifth chapter of Mencius, we read: “When a thing is done
though by no one, then it is the work of Heaven; when a thing comes
about though no one brought it about, then it is the decree of Heaven.”
(5A: 6)
In other words, the decree or mandate of Heaven is something that is
beyond the reach of human power, but a power that in the end can lead
human beings to success. It is a definitive power that is outside the
realm of human power.
Mencius, like Confucius, did not view Heaven as a deity, but believed
that, only when human beings develop their mind or heart to the fullest
and nourish their inborn nature, can they come to know and understand
Heaven. Thus, in chapter seven, he says: “For a person to give full real-
ization to his heart is for him to understand his own nature, and a person
who knows his own nature will know Heaven.” (7A:1)
Ikeda: Confucius viewed Heaven as the power presiding over the uni-
verse as a whole, and at the same time saw it as the source of human
morality. This view seems to have been taken over and refined in the
thinking of Mencius.
In the view of Mencius since Heaven is something that exists within
the individual, he is led to the conclusion that people are innately good
in nature. And because he believes in the goodness of human nature, he
sees the laws or principles of the natural world as constituting ethical

principles—such is the special characteristic of his thought.
And his conviction that if you understand the true nature of human
beings you will understand the heart of Heaven, as stated in the passage
you have just quoted, exemplifies the humanistic outlook that is a par-
ticular mark of Chinese thought. That is to say, Heaven is the source of
morality, and Heaven and human beings are intimately related. There-
fore, human beings need not carry out any elaborate worship of Heaven.
So long as they pay proper attention to human concerns, their efforts
will in the end put them in communication with Heaven. I think it is
important to note that this concept of “Heaven and humankind as one”
constitutes the background of what we know as Chinese humanism and
rationalism.
Buddhism and the Heaven-Human Relationship
Ji: Under Emperor Wu of the Han dynasty, Confucianism was adopted
as the official creed of the state. The most influential Confucian thinker
of the time was Dong Zhongshu (195?–105? BCE), who in his writings
argued clearly and forcefully for the view that Heaven and human
beings combine to form a single entity.
In his Chunqiu fanlu or Luxuriant Gems of the Spring and Autumn
Annals, in the section entitled “How human Beings Second the Num-
bers of Heaven,” he states: “Human beings have 360 joints because this
exactly matches the number of Heaven’s [days]. Their bodies, their
bones and flesh, match the thickness of the earth. Their ears and eyes
are bright and keen like the qualities of the sun and moon, and in their
bodies there are hollows and veins like the configurations of the rivers
and valleys.”
And in speaking of the forces of the yin and yang, he says: “Heaven
too has its moods of joy and anger, and its heart filled with sorrow or
delight which second those of human beings. In the ways in which these
likenesses match up, we see that Heaven and human beings are one.”
These passages are clear examples of the concept of “Heaven and
humankind as one” in the thought of Dong Zhongshu. We must take
care to note, however, that there are elements of superstition in the way
he developed his theory of how Heaven and human beings respond to
and influence one another.
Ikeda: Dong Zhongshu believed that there is a close relationship

between natural phenomena and the state of human society. That is to
say, if the ruler’s actions are good, then the natural world will respond
in a harmonious manner. But if the ruler’s actions are evil, then various
changes and portents will occur in the natural world. Dong Zhongshu
stressed that these changes are intended as a warning to the ruler.
This view of the relationship that exists between Heaven and human
beings influenced the manner in which the teachings of Buddhism were
accepted in China. The Chinese have customarily looked with great
respect on those Buddhist sutras and doctrinal writings that stressed a
theory of portents resembling that already formulated in earlier Chinese
thought. The Jinguangmingjing or Golden Light Sutra, which teaches
that if the ruler of the nation carries out evil actions, the natural world
of Heaven and earth will respond with changes and portents, is a prime
example, and the various Chinese translations and commentaries on it
have played an important role in Chinese Buddhism.
The Japanese Buddhist leader, Nichiren, in his famous treatise
addressed in warning to the rulers of Japan entitled “On Establishing
the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land,” quotes the Golden
Light Sutra.
The Chinese Buddhist scholar Zhanran or the Great Teacher Miaole,
in his commentary on Zhiyi’s Great Concentration and Insight, intro-
duces this concept of “Heaven and humankind as one” as it is embodied
in the Chinese theories of the yin and yang and the Five Elements or
Five Agents. Nichiren, in a treatise entitled “The Unanimous Declara-
tion of the Buddhas of the Three Existences,” quotes Zhanran’s com-
mentary as follows: “You should understand that everything that is con-
tained within this body of ours is modeled after Heaven and earth. Thus
we see that the roundness of the head is patterned after the Heavens, the
squareness of the feet imitate the form of the earth.” Thus the micro-
cosm that is the human body corresponds in form to the macrocosm of
the external world.
Nichiren then goes on to say: “If Heaven itself crumbles, then this
body of mine likewise will crumble; if the earth breaks asunder, my
body too will break asunder; if the elements of earth, water, fire, wind
and space perish, my body too will perish.” The passage emphasizes
that the life of the individual and that of Heaven and earth, which
brought forth and nourished it, the waxing and waning of the universe
as a whole, constitute a single entity.
Nichiren also declares that the basic law of the universe, that which
embodies all its essential elements, is contained within the five charac-
ters myØ-hØ-ren-ge-kyØ, the Chinese title of the Lotus Sutra, that all
forms of life are imminent in this fundamental law of the universe, and
that once this law is revealed and made manifest, all persons just as
they are can attain Buddhahood. They will then be capable of freely
creating a realm of happiness for themselves and others.
Ji: In the Song dynasty, as we have mentioned earlier, the Study of

Principle or Neo-Confucian school appeared in China, and many impor-
tant Confucian thinkers participated in its development. Their views
vary slightly from faction to faction, but on the whole they all embrace
the idea expressed in the phrase “Heaven and humankind as one.”
Zhang Zai (1020–1077), one of the leaders of the movement, clearly
subscribed to such views. Cheng Yi (1033–1107) stated that “Heaven,
earth and human beings are no more than a single Way.” And Zhang Zai
in his “Western Inscription” says: “Heaven is my father and Earth is my
mother, and even such a small creature as I finds an intimate place in
their midst.
“Therefore that which extends throughout the universe I regard as my
body, and that which directs the universe I consider as my nature. All
people are my brothers and sisters, and all things are my companions.”
Ikeda: It is said that the Neo-Confucianism of the Song period was

influenced by the teachings of the Huayan school of Buddhism and by
the later developments within the Tiantai school of Buddhism.
View of Nature of the Daoist, Mohist and Miscellaneous Schools
Ji: Up to now we have talked mainly about the Confucian school in
China, but we should note that this concept of “Heaven and humankind
as one” is not limited to Confucian thinkers. In its broadest meaning,
the concept refers to the relationship between human beings and the
natural world, and how that relationship is to be understood. In this
sense, it figures in the thought of schools other than Confucianism such
as the Daoist, Mohist and Miscellaneous schools.
Ikeda: The Daoist school is particularly noted in Chinese culture for

the emphasis it places upon reverence for nature.
Ji: Yes. For example, Laozi, the leading Daoist thinker, declares:
“Human beings model themselves on Heaven, Heaven models itself on
the Way, and the Way models itself on that which is naturally so.”
(Laozi 25)
Ikeda: Laozi refers to the law of the universe as “the Way.” In other
words, human beings should model themselves on the Way, which is
the correctness of “what is naturally so” or nature. These days, those

who study ecology have come to understand the rhythms that pertain to
the world of nature. And they have come to realize the grave fact that if
these rhythms of the natural world are disrupted or destroyed, it will
mean the destruction of the human race as well.
Jiang: Listening to what Mr. Ikeda has just said, I am reminded of the
Chinese saying, Wu ji bi fan, which means, “When things are carried to
an extreme, they invariably turn in the opposite direction.” If this proce-
dure of “conquering Nature” that is typical of Western civilization is
allowed to dominate the whole world and is carried to its extreme, then
human beings, who have imagined themselves as the conquerors of
Nature, will on the contrary end up being conquered by Nature.
Ji: In the second section of the Zhuangzi, that entitled “Discussion on

Making All Things Equal,” we read: “Heaven and earth were born at
the same time I was, and the ten thousand things are one in me.” From
this we can see that among the thinkers of the Daoist school, this
emphasis upon “Heaven and humankind as one” is even more pro-
nounced than in the Confucian school.
Ikeda: Zhuangzi perceives a kind of great underlying rhythm and har-

mony in the vast universe and the world of nature. Therefore he believes
that human beings should respond and adjust to nature and make that
their way of living
Ji: In the writings of Mozi, another philosopher of the same period, we

find certain contradictions in his views regarding the mandate of Heav-
en and the role of ghosts or spirits. In the chapters entitled “Against
Fatalism” and “Honoring Effort,” he stresses that whether one becomes
rich or poor, honored or disgraced, depends upon the efforts of the indi-
vidual and not upon any decree handed down by fate or Heaven. But in
other chapters such as those entitled “The Will of Heaven” and
“Explaining Ghosts,” he seems to take a quite different view. He views
Heaven as a kind of personalized being who possesses a will and
rewards or punishes human beings. His political thought may be sur-
mised from such chapters as those entitled “Universal Love,” “Against
Offensive Warfare,” “Honoring the Worthy,” and “Honoring Uniformi-
ty.”
In the Lüshi chunqiu or Springs and Autumns of Mr. Lü, a syncretic
work written in 241 BCE, in the section entitled, “Responding to Like-
ness,” we read: “All things alike are carried to completion in terms of

likeness or agreement of categories, where these likenesses merge.
Therefore, because Yao practices goodness, all good things come to
him, and because Jie practices evil, all evils gather around him. Thus it
is stated in the ‘Warnings of Shang’ ‘Heaven sends down disaster or
bestows good luck in all cases in response to some definite action’”
And earlier in the section it is stated: “Clouds over water appear to
have fish scales, the clouds of drought are like smoke and fire, and rain
clouds seem like waves of water. All resemble the categories of the
things that produced them, and none fail to show that fact to human
beings.”
From these passages we see that the Lüshi chunqiu believes that
human beings and the natural world respond to one another. We have
cited examples from various texts of ancient China, and to continue fur-
ther would take us too far a field. But it should be obvious from the pas-
sages cited that the concept of “Heaven and humankind as one” was
very widespread in early Chinese thought.
Ikeda: There were of course exceptions—thinkers such as Xunzi or

Wang Chong who denied that such a relationship exists between Heav-
en and human beings. But if we compare the views of the two main
divisions of early Chinese thought, as represented in the rival schools of
Confucianism and Daoism, I think we can say that, in their view of
nature, there is no basic difference between the highest ideal of the
Confucian outlook expressed in the term “Heaven,” and the highest
ideal of Daoism, expressed in the word dao, or the “Way.”
The Ancient Indian Concept of “Brahman and Self”
Ji: The same general type of concept, I believe, existed not only in Chi-
nese thought, but in other areas of Eastern culture in ancient times. We
might cite as a typical example the thought of India, the cradle of the
Buddhist religion. Of course, there were various schools of thought in
ancient India.
Ikeda: Buddhist texts record that there were some ninety different
schools of one type or another. Most famous were the so-called
Sa∂darßana or six types of darßana or doctrine. These six are the
schools known as Vedånta, M¥måµså, Såˆkhya, Yoga, Nyåya, and
Vaiße∑ika.
Jiang: The Sanskrit word darßana is usually translated in early Chinese

texts as “view,” though in modern Chinese it is translated as “thought”

or “philosophy.” The names of the six “views” or schools of philosophy
are rendered in classical and modern Chinese as Fei-tan-duo, Mi-man-
cha, Shu-lun, Yu-Jia, Zheng-li and Sheng-lun. The first, second and
fourth of these names are simply transcriptions of the sound of the San-
skrit name, while the other three, Shu-lun or Number Theory, Zheng-li
or Correct Principle, and Sheng-1un or Superior Theory, represent
translations of the Sanskrit names.
Ji: These various schools propounded various different theories, but one
may say that basically they were all influenced by the view that human
beings and nature merge into a single entity. Of course the terms used in
China in ancient times do not exactly match those in use in India, but
we may say that the Chinese word tian or Heaven, which designates the
universe of t-he world of nature, is equivalent to the Sanskrit word
Brahman. And the Chinese word ren or person is equivalent to the San-
skrit Ótman or “self.” Thus, while the Chinese speak of “Heaven and
humankind,” the Indians speak of “Brahman and self,” though basically
the meaning is the same in both cases.
Ikeda: According to the eminent Indologist Oldenburg (1854–1920),

the word Brahman originally designated the sacred and magical power
of the words of prayer of the Vedas. And this explanation has been gen-
erally accepted as correct. According to the religion of the Brahmans or
priests of ancient India, which centered about the conducting of sacri-
fices, the words of prayer uttered by the priests carrying out the sacrifice
possessed a power that was capable of moving or manipulating the
gods, and this power later came to be viewed in a more abstract manner
as a law or principle governing the universe.
In other words, without denying the mystical nature of the sacrifices
themselves, the existence of the power of human beings to influence
nature, the subjective aspect of the sacrificial act was given clear recog-
nition in the term Brahman. Human beings are thus not mere playthings
to be tossed about by the gods or the winds of chance. They exist as an
integral part of the universe or the natura1 world, one that interacts with
and is merged with nature.
Later when the Brahmanist religion declined and its rituals became
tainted with superstition, Buddhism, particularly the branch of it known
as Mahayana Buddhism, appeared, emphasizing the worth of human
beings, stressing their role as members of the universe and their right to
independent existence in the context of the universe, singing a great
song of humanity. It taught that the universe is the self, and at the same
time, that the self is the universe.
Ji: In the Rig Veda, the oldest sacred text of the Brahmanist religion of
ancient India, we find the concept of “Heaven and humankind as one”
clearly and concretely expressed in the “Hymn of the Primeval Man.”
The Creation Hymns of the Rig Veda
Ikeda: Yes. The hymn is found in the tenth book of the Rig Veda. It
describes a primeval man named Purusha who has a thousand heads
that cover all of Heaven and earth and extend beyond them and who has
a thousand eyes. It relates the myth of how the gods offer him up as a
sacrifice and from the sacrifice all the ten thousand things are born. The
moon is born from his mind, the sun from his eye; the gods Indra, the
god of thunder, and Agni, the god of fire, are born from his mouth; the
wind is born from his breath, the atmosphere from his navel, the Heav-
ens from his head, and the four quarters of the earth from his ear.
Ji: The Rig Veda also contains other hymns that pertain to the creation
of the world, such as those entitled “Hymn on the Lord of Birth,”
“Hymn of Creation,” and “Hymn on the Lord of Prayer.”
Ikeda: For the sake of our readers, I might here add a note of explana-
tion on these titles. The “Hymn on the Lord of Birth” deals with the god
Prajåpati, who is the god of creation. It is found in the tenth book of the
Rig Veda. But it keeps repeating the question, “Who is the creator of all
things?” It probably dates from a time when the people of India had
begun to question the nature of the gods described in the earlier hymns
and to consider them in more rational terms. It is embued with a feeling
of spiritual striving as the singer attempts to discover the truth or princi-
ple underlying existence.
The “Hymn on the Lord of Prayer, “deals with Brahmanaspati, the
Lord of Brahman or Lord of Prayer. In it we see early evidence of how
the people of ancient India sought to discover, behind and beyond the
words of prayer uttered in the sacrificial rituals, some mystic and uni-
versal force that they called Brahman.
In any event, these hymns represent attempts to express the idea of a
single unifying principle that brings together Heaven and Earth and
human beings.
Ji: The Japanese scholars Takakusu JunichirØ and Kimura Taiken, in

their Indo tetsugaku shËkyØ shi or History of Indian Thought and Reli-
gion, summarize the situation in the following way: “Strictly speaking,
these hymns are not in full agreement with one another, but they have
certain points in common. (1) They view the universe as having a single
origin. (2) They believe that all the phenomena of the world spring from
that single origin. (3) They believe that after all these phenomena have
come into being, that origin remains unchanged...With the Upanishads,
we have the famous statement, Ekam eva advit¥yam or ‘Only one, not
two.’ And we can see this same line of thought in a further stage of
development in the declaration of Mahayana Buddhism that ‘There is
only the Law of the one vehicle, / there are not two, there are not
three.’”
The Buddhist Concept of EshØ Funi
Ikeda: The passage that has just been quoted, “There is only the Law of
the one vehicle, / there are not two, there are not three,” is a very
famous one from chapter two, “Expedient Means,” of the Lotus Sutra.
The Buddha is explaining how he preaches in various different ways in
order to fit the capacities of various different kinds of persons. It would
appear, therefore, that when he preaches in a certain way for the voice-
hearers, in another way for the pratyekabuddhas, and in still another
way for the bodhisattvas, that he is preaching a different doctrine for
each. In fact, however, he is preaching only “the Law of the one vehi-
cle.”
Needless to say, this “Law of the one vehicle” refers to the great
Truth that embraces all things; the word “one” here is not to be taken in
a relative meaning. Buddhism teaches and at all times continues to seek
a vast principle or basic law that encompasses everything. And, as the
chapter goes on to explain, the Buddhas manifest their great compas-
sion by appearing in the world when human beings are experiencing the
time of greatest hardship.
Ji: In the thought of the Upanishads we often find the expression

“Brahman and the self are one.” Brahman, as we have noted earlier,
refers to the universe of nature, while the word åtman or “self” refers to
the individual. The implications of the expression, therefore, are in gen-
eral comparable to those contained in the Chinese expression “Heaven
and humankind as one.”
In your dialogues with Dr. Toynbee, Mr. Ikeda, you speak in the fol-
lowing manner: “According to Buddhism, the natural world exists as an
independent life system. Only when human beings manage to harmo-
nize with the natural world, which is their environment, can both of
them receive and enjoy life. There is no other way in which the individ-
ual human being can hope to develop his or her own life in a creative
fashion.
“Buddhism teaches that the relationship between human beings and
nature is not one of opposition but of mutual dependence. This relation-
ship of underlying principle is described by the term EshØ Funi.”
There are other passages in the same book that give important
insights into the principle of EshØ Funi, but I will not quote them here. I
am in complete agreement with these opinions of yours, Mr. Ikeda. And
Dr. Toynbee in the same book indicates that he too agrees with them.
Professor Oh Hyeong-geun, a Korean scholar of Dongguk Universi-
ty, has written me a letter in which he stresses that the concept of
“Heaven and humankind as one” is a distinguishing feature of Eastern
thought. In his letter he writes: “I personally feel that the concept of
‘Heaven and humankind as one’ is probably related to the thought
expressed in ‘The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana’ in the phrase
‘matter and mind are one.’ As the Chinese Buddhist scholar Sengzhao
(374–414) states: ‘Heaven and Earth and I are of the same root, the ten
thousand things and I are a single body.’ I believe that this kind of
thought represents the highest point of development in Eastern philoso-
phy.”
The Tiantai Concept of
“Three Thousand Realms in One Instant of Thought”
Ikeda: The treatise known as “The Awakening of Faith in the
Mahayana” belongs to a group of Buddhist texts that deal with the con-
cept of the “Matrix of Tathågata,” which teaches that all persons are
endowed with the Buddha nature. Sengzhao was a disciple of the Bud-
dhist scholar and translator Kumåraj¥va, who came to China from Cen-
tral Asia. Under Kumåraj¥va’s direction he became an outstanding
exponent of the concept of kong or Emptiness as it is expounded in the
Prajnå sutras.
The “Matrix of Tathågata” concept of “The Awakening of Faith in
the Mahayana” is related to the theory of “original enlightenment,”
which holds that ordinary individuals just as they are are Buddhas. The
concept of Emptiness in the Prajnå or Wisdom sutras is designed to
enable persons who are pursuing the path of the bodhisattva to free
themselves from all feelings of attachment. The phrase from “The
Awakening of Faith” that has just been quoted, “matter and mind are
one,” is allied in thought to the view expounded in original enlighten-
ment thought that, from the point of view of Buddhahood, the physical
body, material things, and things of the spirit are all one in nature.
The concept of Emptiness as expounded by Sengzhao holds that,
once one has freed oneself from attachments to linguistic or common-
sensical categories, then all things are seen to be equal.
Strictly speaking, there are differences between these two concepts of
Emptiness and “Matrix of Tathagata.” That is why we have said earlier
that the idea of “Heaven and humankind as one” appears in a number of
different forms. And this variety in its various different forms indicates
that, as a basic concept, it has proved capable of giving rise to great
richness of thought.
Ji: Professor Oh, in his letter goes on to speak about the thought of the
Huayan school of Buddhism. He writes: “The concept of ‘the causation
of the Dharma-realm’ as it is expounded in Huayan thought—how,
when good causes come together, they produce a certain result, how all
things act to assist one another—this represents one of the finest expres-
sions of Eastern thought.”
Ikeda: Huayan thought has as its basis the concept of the world and the
universe as that concept is systematically set forth in the Huayan or
Flower Garland Sutra. This doctrine teaches that the Dharma-realm or
the universe as a whole originates through the process of causation or
through the action of mind alone. There is no objective world that exists
apart from mind. The phenomenal world comes into being through the
action of mind.
In the memorial lecture I gave on the occasion of SGI Day of 1998,
when I was discussing environmental problems, I described the famous
simile of Indra’s Net that has traditionally been used to explain the cau-
sation of the Dharma-realm. According to this simile, there is a great
net that hangs in the palace of Indra, the god of thunder. The net has
countless joints or knots where its meshes come together, and each of
these joints is adorned with a Jewel. Each of these jewels clearly reflects
all the other jewels in the net, so that every part of the net reflects every
other part.
This, according to Huayan literature, is the way in which all the
countless things of the phenomenal world endlessly interact with one
another, thus bringing about the causation or arising of the Dharma-
realm.
The concept of causation expressed in the doctrine of Emptiness
expounded in the Wisdom sutras, which exercised such a profound

influence upon Kumåraj¥va and Sengzhao, on the other hand, deals with
the activities of consciousness and the use of language. For example,
the idea or concept of “parent” presupposes the existence of a concept
of “child.” The concept of “parent” cannot exist apart from the concept
of “child.” When people speak, they distinguish between the two cate-
gories of parent and child, but these categories have no independent
existence. They are no more than products of consciousness or the use
of language, relative concepts that depend upon one another for their
existence.
The doctrine of Emptiness views causation from an angle that is dif-
ferent from that expressed in Huayan thought. But both systems of
thought are alike in warning us that we should not view the things of the
world as having a fixed or substantive existence.
The concept of “three thousand realms in one instant of thought,”
referred to in Japanese as ichinen sanzen, which is expounded in the
thought of the Tiantai school of Buddhism, may be said to represent an
attempt to integrate the two systems of thought just outlined. This doc-
trine holds that human beings, in the space of ichinen or one instant of
thought, one moment of the mind, have the ability to bring forth all the
three thousand realms that make up the world.
The “three thousand realms” alluded to here correspond to what is
known as the three realms of existence, namely, the realm of the five
components, the realm of living beings, and the realm of the environ-
ment. In terms of the concept of EshØ Funi that we have discussed earli-
er, the realm of the five components and the realm of living beings cor-
respond to shØhØ or the living self, the subjective world, and the realm
of environment corresponds to ehØ, the insentient environment or objec-
tive world.
These two realms, that of living beings and that of the insentient
environment, are Funi or “not two.” All that makes up the universe or
the world of nature can thus be grasped or encompassed in one instant
of thought. This concept of “three thousand realms in one instant of
thought,” which is basically at one with the concept in Indian philoso-
phy of “Brahman and self as one” and that in Chinese thought of
“Heaven and humankind as one,” deserves to be called one of the high
points of Eastern thought.
Since you have read excerpts from the letter from Professor Oh, we
might here consider how the concept of “Heaven and humankind as
one” is reflected in the thought of the culture of the Korean Peninsula.
“Heaven and Humankind As One” in Korean Thought

Ji: Korea possesses a relatively long history of philosophical growth
and development. On the one hand Korea has its own distinctive
thought, and at the same time it has been influenced by the thought of
its immediate neighbor, China. The doctrines of Confucianism were
introduced to Korea in the Three Kingdoms period (57–668). The Con-
fucian doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven exerted a strong influence on
Korean thought. In the closing years of the Koryo dynasty, which ended
in 1392, and the beginning of the succeeding Yi dynasty, the teachings
of the Song dynasty Study of Principle or Neo-Confucianism were
introduced to Korea.
Ikeda: And the concept of “Heaven and humankind as one,” which

forms the basis of these new currents of thought, I suppose, was at that
time introduced into the thought of the Korean Peninsula.
Ji: That is correct. The concept of “Heaven and humankind as one” was
accorded a place of preeminence, as we see in the works of such
thinkers as Ri Saek, Jung Mong-joo, and Jung Do-jun. These men spec-
ulated deeply on the nature of “the principle that underlies Heaven,
earth, and the ten thousand things.” And another thinker who appeared
at this time, Kwun Keun, designed a “Diagram of the Unity of the Mind
Nature of Heaven and Humankind,” and wrote: “Human beings, ani-
mals, plants, trees—these possess a thousand, ten thousand different
forms, but all flow forth from the one Supreme Polarity. Therefore each
of the ten thousand things is endowed with its own principle, and these
ten thousand principles all come from the same one source.”
Ikeda: With regard to the Buddhism of the Korean Peninsula at this

time, the late years of the Koryo dynasty, in the countryside there were
some Buddhist monks who lived a life of poverty and devoted them-
selves to the propagation of the teachings. But in the capital, the tem-
ples had become mere places of recreation for the members of the court
and the aristocracy. As a result, Buddhism became the object of severe
criticism from the Confucian scholars of the time, much as was the situ-
ation in Japan during the Edo period.
The statesman and thinker Ri Saek, whom you have just mentioned,
submitted a memorial to King Kong-min in which he attacked the Bud-
dhist followers for their excessive greed. And Jung Do-jun too was very
outspoken in his opposition to Buddhism. Of course, such anti-Buddhist
documents to some extent reflect the struggles that were taking place
between various political factions and religious groups, but there is no
denying that there was much corruption in the Buddhism of the period.
In this atmosphere of critical thinking, those Korean thinkers who
devoted themselves to the thought of the great Chinese Neo-Confucian
philosopher Zhu Xi deepened their speculations. For the thought of Zhu
Xi and his followers, one may say, went beyond mere factional disputes
between Confucians and Buddhists to address more profound concerns,
seeking earnestly to grasp and understand the essential nature of human
beings. To the degree that the concept of “Heaven and humankind as
one” contributed to the development of such thought in the culture of
the Korean Peninsula, it was clearly of great significance.
The Monotheistic View of Nature
Ji: I am not very familiar with the situation in the Palestine region in
ancient times, but I had always supposed that the ancient Hebraic cul-
ture and the culture of ancient Egypt and that of Babylon and Assyria in
the Tigris-Euphrates area, as well as the Islamic culture of Arabia, was
in general allied with the type of Eastern culture that we have been dis-
cussing. But in reading the account of the dialogues between you, Mr.
Ikeda, and Dr. Toynbee, I have become aware of my error.
Dr. Toynbee observes that the Buddhist concept of EshØ Funi or the
oneness of life and its environment, and the world view that prevailed in
Greece and Rome in the pre-Christian period, were very much alike. It
was the revolutionary concept of Judaic monotheism, according to Dr.
Toynbee, that opened the way for the deliberate, wholesale violation of
the EshØ Funi manner of thinking.
To quote his words, “The effect of this revolutionary doctrine was to
disrupt the Funi (oneness) between shØhØ (the living self) and ehØ (the
environment). Man was divorced from his natural environment, which
was divested of its former aura of divinity.... The salutary respect and
awe with which man had originally regarded his environment was thus
dispelled by Judaic monotheism in the versions of its Israelite origina-
tors and of Christians and Muslims.” (Choose Life, p. 40.)
Eastern and Western Models of Thought
Ikeda: As an embodiment of the view of nature typical of Judaic
monotheism, people often quote the words of God that are recorded in
Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament: “And God said, Let us
make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion
over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle,
and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon
the earth.”
Modern scholars offer various different interpretations of this passage
from Genesis. But any consideration of global environmental problems
must take into consideration this view put forward by the monotheistic
religions. There can be no question that this view of nature typical of
Judaic monotheism, in which human beings are seen as exercising
dominion over the natural world, has formed the basis of the mechanis-
tic view of nature of modern times, a view exemplified by the Cartesian
dualism of matter and mind.
Ji: On the other hand, Dr. Toynbee demonstrates in his discussion that
Jesus and the twelfth century Saint Francis of Assisi in their thinking
were in accord with the concept of EshØ Funi.
Ikeda: Speaking of Jesus, Dr. Toynbee says: “Jesus lived in Palestine at

a time when most Palestinian Jews were still peasants, living in harmo-
ny with their nonhuman environment in the spirit of EshØ Funi.
(Choose Life, p. 41.)
And of St. Francis he states: “Francis was inspired by Jesus, and,
though both were brought up in the Judaic tradition, their attitude to ehØ
(or the environment) was the opposite of the attitude implicit in the
Judaic ideology.” And he adds, “In Buddhist terms, Francis was an
enthusiastic believer and, and lover of, EshØ Funi.” (ibid.)
The late Dr. Nakamura Hajime, who, I know, was a good friend of
yours, Professor Ji, speaking of the statement found in Buddhism that
“Plants, trees, the earth itself—all are capable of attaining Buddha-
hood,” which he sees as one expression of the concept of EshØ Funi,
mentions St. Francis. He writes: “Because of his love for God, he saw
all of the things God had created, not only the animals but fire, wind,
the earth, all the phenomena of the natural world, as objects of love.”
(Jiko no tankyË, Seidosha)
Ji: I see Eastern culture as representing a model of thought that is syn-

thetic and inclusive in nature (dualisms coming together to form a sin-
gle entity), and Western culture as representing a model of thought that
is analytic and exclusionist in nature. This, of course, is only an
overview of the situation. I do not mean to imply that either East or
West are one-hundred-percent pure examples of such tendencies.
Ikeda: That seems to me a very important way of looking at the situa-

tion. Like you, Professor Ji, I believe that only if the Chinese concept of
“Heaven and humankind as one” and the Buddhist concept of EshØ
Funi or the oneness of life and its environment are embraced by the
world at large, can we hope to overcome our environmental problems
and insure the happiness of the human race.
THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY AND THE FUTURE OF HUMANKIND
Global Civilization and the East

Ikeda: Dr. Toynbee, setting aside the narrow, one-dimensional Euro-
centric view of history, was one of the first to formulate a concept of
history that, while recognizing the relative value of many different
kinds of civilizations reacting with one another, saw the civilization of
the globe as a whole. And motivating his admirable intellectual labors
lay an acute consciousness of crisis, a conviction that humankind, if it
was not to face annihilation, must somehow in the future learn to live as
a single global family. A quarter of a century has elapsed since he
passed away, and the trials that beset humanity have if anything become
graver than ever.
In our next series of discussions, I hope we can, while remaining
fully aware of the roots of this crisis that faces our present civilization,
consider some of the ways that Eastern culture can fulfill its mission as
a contributor to a global civilization.
Ji: I am in full agreement with the idea put forward by Dr. Toynbee and
other scholars, namely, that every culture, every civilization, is destined
to go through the successive phases of formation, expansion, and decay,
and that no culture or civilization can hope to last forever.
Looking at human history as a whole, we see that in the past the cul-
ture of the East over a rather long period of time acted as a leader to
other peoples of the world and occupied a monopolistic position. At
that time the West, with the exception of Greece and Rome, was still in
a stage of confusion and darkness, and had not yet attained a level dis-
tinguished enough to merit the designation of culture.
After the Industrial Revolution, however, Western science and tech-
nology developed in a striking manner, and under the influence of colo-
nialist doctrines, Western colonies were established in many areas of
the world. As a result, Western culture bit by bit came to occupy the
monopolistic position in the world that had earlier been that of Eastern
culture.
Ikeda: The English word “culture” derives from a French word mean-
ing cultivation or farming. It is said that the human activity of farming
originated in southeast Asia. If we see the commencement of farming
activities as the true beginning of human culture, we could say that
these took place some ten thousand years ago.
It was only with the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century
and the Industrial Revolution of the century that followed that European
civilization gained the place of global dominance that it holds today.
Thus this is a phenomenon that has appeared only in the last two or
three hundred years of that ten thousand year period we have just men-
tioned. Before the conditions became ripe for the occurrence of the sci-
entific revolution, the West had to take over the accomplishments of the
civilizations of India, the Byzantine Empire, China and the Islamic
countries.
The natural science of ancient Greece did not contribute directly to
this development. During the Middle Ages, when Europe was only an
outlying corner of the vast Eurasian continent, it was the influence of
the Islamic world, at that time by far the most advanced civilization,
that the West needed in order to go forward.
And we should also note that Greek civilization itself was born from
a fusion of Eastern and Western cultural influences. It was never the
creation and possession of Europe alone.
Looked at from this point of view, we can see that the revolution in
scientific knowledge and technology that has characterized Europe in
modern times is the product of the cooperative efforts of a number of
different Eurasian civilizations acting in concert—otherwise it could
never have come about.
Francis Bacon, a thinker who exercised a decisive influence over the
direction of modern scientific thought, speaks of three great inventions
that “changed the world,” namely, the invention of printing, of gunpow-
der, and of the compass. And all of these inventions originated in China.
This is eloquent testimony to the high level of science and technology
that prevailed in China in premodern times.
Jiang: I agree completely with what Mr. Ikeda has just said. And with
regard to the declaration by Francis Bacon (1561–1626) that printing,
gunpowder and the compass, three inventions that originated in China
and were transmitted to Europe, “changed the world,” we might note
Bacon’s own words. He writes: “We must carefully observe the impor-
tance, influence and effect that various inventions have. The clearest
example of this is the case of printing, gunpowder, and the compass,
three inventions that were unknown to the people of antiquity.

“All of these inventions have occurred only recently, and people are
still largely unaware of them and have nothing to say about them. And
yet these three inventions have brought about a complete change in
three areas that affect the conditions and affairs of the entire world,
namely, the area of the written word (the way in which knowledge is
communicated), the area of warfare, and the area of navigation.
“And from these inventions countless applications will unfold. From
this we may be sure that, throughout the world, in whatever empire or
religious group or planet, there will be nothing that exercises a greater
power and effect upon humanity than these three mechanical inven-
tions.” (Ji Xianwang wenji, vol. 6, Jiangxi jiaoyu chubanshe, Nov. 1996,
first printing, p. 300.)
These words of Bacon clearly confirm the view that has just been
expressed by Mr. Ikeda. The scientific and technological revolution that
has taken place in Europe in modern times has come about as a result of
exchanges and interactions taking place among the various civilizations
of the Eurasian continent.
But these words of Bacon lead me to ask certain questions. Why, for
example, after these three inventions of printing, gunpowder and the
compass, had been transmitted to Europe, did they exercise a power and
effect that was capable of changing “the conditions and affairs of the
entire world”? And why did they not exercise a comparable effect in the
land where they originated?
In the process of considering these questions, my attention was
drawn to the following words of Professor Zhang Guangzhi, whose
opinions I have referred to earlier.
Professor Zhang writes: “The two great civilizations of China and the
West have from the beginning been dominated by basically different
principles. Chinese civilization has its origin in the three dynasties of
antiquity, the Xia, Shang and Zhou. The material wealth in existence at
the time these dynasties reigned supplied the basic conditions needed
for the rise and development of this civilization. And in order to accu-
mulate and concentrate that wealth, the civilization relied upon the
acquisition and exercise of political power.
“Western civilization has its origin in ancient Mesopotamia. And the
accumulation of wealth at that time was brought about through the
application of new science and technology that was used to improve the
transport of various natural resources acquired through trade.
“China and the West have undergone numerous changes and vicissi-
tudes over the long course of their historical development. But viewing
the situation as a whole, we may say that for the past several thousand
years, in matters pertaining to the production of wealth and the manage-
ment of human affairs, China and the West have followed two different
models or methods, a political model and an economic model.” (op. cit.,
p. 48, Journal of the Chinese University of Hong Kong , Fall–Winter,
1990.)
Thus, as Professor Zhang points out, in their origin and development,
the civilization of China and that of the West have been dominated by
two different principles, a political model of development and an eco-
nomic one. This, I believe, is a correct assessment of the situation and
one that answers the questions I raised earlier, as well as other similar
questions. And we may say further that in drawing attention to the polit-
ical nature of Chinese civilization, which is one of its marked character-
istics, it also offers a key to the better understanding of the history of
Chinese civilization.
The Many Global Problems Facing Humanity
Ji: The Chinese proverb says “Thirty years of River west, thirty years
of River east,” meaning that everything flourishes and decays in turn. So
in the several thousand years of human history, the relationship between
Eastern and Western culture has been like this—“Thirty years of River
west, thirty years of River east.”
China during the times of the Han and Tang dynasties was in effect
the economic and cultural center of the world—this is a fact that no one
can deny. But from the time around the end of the Ming dynasty, the
science and learning of the West began to spread to the East, and little
by little the situation changed. The Opium War of 1840 marks a signifi-
cant turning point. Japan set about earnestly studying Western culture,
and in 1868 the Meiji Restoration took place. Thus Japan has been able
to achieve marked success more quickly than has China, and up until
the present has occupied a top level position in the world in terms of
science and technology.
In the words of Qian Binsi, “One may say that in the last hundred
years, Europe has been the father of the culture of the people of the
world.” In my words, this is a case of “Thirty years of River west, thirty
years of River east.” This is the way the world is shaped at present—
one must recognize the fact. Westerners, relying upon their superiority
in science and technology, have become the heroes of the age.
But in my view, there has never in the history of humanity been a cul-
ture that lasted ten thousand years. Beginning with the twenty-first
century, “River east” will come to take the place of “River west,” and
Eastern culture will once again regain its position of world dominance.
As we have noted earlier, this is something that Spengler in Germany,
Dr. Toynbee in England, and many other knowledgeable persons in the
West have astutely sensed.
Jiang: I remember when you, Professor Ji, first made public this state-
ment that, viewing the several thousand years of human history, one
could say that the relationship between Eastern and Western culture was
a situation of “Thirty years of River west, thirty years of River east.”
The statement attracted wide attention in academic circles both in China
and abroad and aroused much impassioned debate.
Then, two or three years later, in February of 1991, I noticed that the
ChËgai NippØ in Tokyo had run an article introducing these views of
Professor Ji and commenting on them. And later, when I visited the late
and highly respected Japanese scholar Nakamura Hajime, who at that
time was still in good health, he mentioned Professor Ji’s views and
expressed high regard for them. I have forgotten the exact words he
used, but the earnestness and sincerity of feeling with which he spoke
of them made an unforgettable impression on me.
Ikeda: The center of civilization in the nineteenth century was Europe,

and with the twentieth century it shifted to America and the Soviet
Union, which are derivatives of European civilization. Like you, I fore-
see that the following twenty-first century will without doubt be the
century of Asia and the Pacific.
The area of Eastern Asia in particular, though it is faced with prob-
lems of currency crisis and political instability, will no doubt continue
to show a sustained aptitude for dynamic development.
But we must realize that Asia’s present day political and economic
development is very much tied to the science, technology and industry
that are the products of modern Western civilization. That civilization,
which originated in the West, is now in the process of spreading
throughout the entire globe.
In terms of economics, the so-called market economy is becoming a
global phenomenon. The spread of advanced methods of science and
technology has revolutionized the way in which society gathers and
communicates information, and biotechnology is opening up a whole
new science of life centered around DNA studies.
At the same time, however, this process of globalization is destroying
ecosystems on a worldwide scale, and the market economy, that now
affects the entire world, is widening the gap between the rich and the
poor. Refugee populations continue to grow, new virus-spread diseases

are proliferating, and we are faced with a whole barrage of global prob-
lems. And in our present day populations we see increasing signs of
mental and psychological disorders, troubles of the mind are on the
uprise, and particularly in the more advanced countries, identity crisis is
becoming an ever-growing concern.
These global problems and the anomie besetting humanity as a whole
have precipitated a crisis that affects the human population of the entire
world, including the area of East Asia. The question that is thrust upon
those of us in East Asia today, therefore, is whether or not we can create
a vision of a truly global civilization that will benefit all humanity.
Jiang: Human civilization as a whole without doubt stands at a cross-

roads, a point in time that demands a clear decision. In the twentieth
century that is just now ending, the world has seen the unfolding of var-
ious highly important events. Among these are two that have exercised
an enormous influence upon human culture and civilization, namely, the
occurrence of worldwide wars and the rapid advances of science and
technology.
Warfare on a worldwide scale has erupted twice, once with the First
World War, which took place largely in Europe, and then with the Sec-
ond World War, which involved the entire globe. The destruction and
suffering that war inflicts upon humanity has increased in severity with
each outbreak of hostilities. And is it possible that a Third World War
could occur? So far as I know, there is no statesman anywhere who can
say with conviction that the occurrence of such a war is impossible.
The most important concern of all persons of good will therefore
should be to insure that such a global war be avoided and that peace be
maintained. For this is a question that involves the very survival of the
human race.
And of equal importance with this question of maintaining peace, one
that likewise concerns the survival of the human race, is that of the
development and growth of society, particularly as it concerns the
development of science and technology.
Peace and development—these are the two great questions con-
fronting human society, questions that are today recognized as being of
international concern.
The solution to the problem of the maintenance of peace depends
mainly upon relations between human beings and other human beings.
The solution to the problem of the growth and development of society
depends upon the relations between human beings and nature.
Human society seeks not only peace, but growth and advancement as
well. For if there is no peace, then advancement will never be possible,
and if growth is neglected, there can be no peace. Such a truth is easily
enough stated, and easily enough understood, and would seem to pre-
sent few problems. When we look at it more closely, however, we see
that there are problems indeed.
Everyone of course wants peace. But peace comes in two varieties.
One is the kind of peace that is like the still waters in a pond, a peace
that is without life or vitality, what we might call a merely negative
peace. The other is the peace of a vast and steadily flowing river which,
when the wind is calm, shows only gentle ripples, a peace that is over-
flowing with vitality. This we could call a positive peace.
Obviously, what we seek is such a positive peace, because such a
peace is beneficial to the furtherance of human activity and creativity.
With regard to the advancement of society, this of course is desirable.
But here again there are two types to be distinguished, development that
is evil in nature and excessive, and development that is moderate in
nature and beneficial.
Development that places inordinate emphasis upon development
alone, that sees a need to dominate nature and ”conquer” it, is surely
evil or unsound development. Such development, as Mr. Ikeda has
pointed out, poses a worldwide threat and leads to a whole host of prob-
lems. The only way to overcome the crisis that such development pre-
cipitates is to abandon once and for all the approach that seeks to con-
quer nature and to adopt a wholly different approach. And this alterna-
tive approach is one that sees the universe as, in the term of the Eastern
concept, “Heaven and humankind as one,” that plans and creates a
social system marked by moderation, and that follows the path of bene-
ficial development.
As Mr. Ikeda has pointed out, there are good reasons for believing
that the “twenty-first century will without doubt be the century of Asia
and the Pacific.” I have great confidence in the accuracy of his predic-
tion.
“The Commiserating Mind” and “The Mind of Compassion”
Ji: My own personal view is that, in the way in which they deal with
the relationship between human beings and nature, Eastern culture and
Western culture are quite different. To speak somewhat exaggeratedly,
one may say that they are fundamentally opposed.
The dominant concept in the West is that nature is to be conquered or
overcome, while the concept in the East is based on the idea of synthe-
sis, that urges that all the ten thousand things of the human and natural
worlds constitute a single harmonious whole.
The West launches an assault upon nature, violently seeking to gain
its ends. And there are times when it appears to be successful in doing
so. The people of the West look to the world of nature to fulfill the
materialistic needs of their daily lives, and as a result their lives become
enriched. And this leads them to grow enraptured with their success, to
take inordinate pride in it, to see themselves as the favored ones of
Heaven, as the rulers of the globe.
Ikeda: The first thinker to put forward the modern Western idea of man
as the conqueror of nature was Francis Bacon. Before that the earlier
Christian view of the world prevailed, a hierarchical one in which God
was seen as the creator, human beings as on a level below, and below
them in turn were the things of nature, which God had given into the
care of human beings.
Bacon took this traditional view a step further, clearly enunciating the
idea of human beings as mastering, attacking and dominating nature, as
becoming the rulers of the natural world. This is a view that does not
permit any idea of peaceful coexistence with nature.
This view then combined with them, mechanistic views of Descartes
and Galileo’s methods of experimental science to bring about a revolu-
tion in science and technology. And then, as though to demonstrate
Bacon’s assertion that knowledge is power, the following three hundred
years saw the emergence of the West as the dominator of the world and
the domination of the world of nature by human beings.
Ji: The Eastern attitude toward nature is one that believes that we
should be friends with nature, should understand nature and come to
know it, and only then should seek something from it. And this
approach, this attitude, has become crystallized in philosophical terms
in the phrase “Heaven and humankind as one.”
The basis of Eastern culture, the synthetic mode of thinking, recog-
nizes the concept of synthesis and universal relationship and takes
shape in the view of the relationship between human beings and nature
that sees the two as constituting a single entity. Human beings and all
other animals are included within this entity.
Human beings must not view other animals as their enemies or try to
dominate them. The fact that human beings eat the flesh of animals is
unavoidable, though from ancient times in the East there have been reli-
gions such as Buddhism that have inveighed against the taking of life
and the eating of animal flesh.

The thought native to China expresses a feeling of sympathy toward
birds and animals. Perhaps the most famous example of this is found in
the words of the poem that read: “I beg you, don’t shoot the springtime
birds, / their chicks are in the nest, waiting for their mother’s return.”
This kind of pity and sympathy for birds and animals is very moving,
but it is seldom to be found in Western poetry. The Confucian philoso-
pher Mencius expresses the same kind of emotional approach when he
states that all people are endowed with a “commiserating mind.” (Men-
cius, IIA)
Ikeda: In the Sutta Nipåta we find the following words of the Buddha
Shakyamuni: “As a mother will risk her life to protect her only child, so
should you arouse a feeling of boundless compassion toward all living
beings.” The statement of Mencius regarding “a commiserating mind”
which Professor Ji has cited and Shakyamuni’s “mind of compassion”
both refer to a deep feeling of sympathy not only for other human
beings but for all the ten thousand things of the world.
The people of the East have taken care to nourish to the fullest this
kind of symbiotic relationship with the natural world. Unless human
beings can cultivate this awareness of a symbiotic relationship that links
them with all other expressions of the great life force, then there is no
way to halt the human race in its march to annihilation.
Jiang: Buddhism speaks of the “three poisons” of greed, anger and stu-
pidity. Greed, we should note, stands in first place, and this, I believe, is
as it should be.
Dr. Toynbee has the following to say on this subject: “Our present
greed threatens to rob future generations by using up irreplaceable
resources.
“Moreover, greed is an evil in itself. It is a feature of the animality of
human nature, but man, besides being an animal, is something more. In
indulging our greed, we lose human dignity. Therefore, so far from
stimulating our greed, we ought to restrain it—and this on principle,
even if greed were not producing the disastrous material effects of pol-
lution for the present generation and of destruction for posterity—if
mankind is to survive pollution.
“Since the Industrial Revolution, manufacturers have been trying, by
advertising, to condition the public into giving priority over all other
objectives to the maximum satisfaction of greed. We need to reverse the
order of our priorities and to make the restraint of greed and the practice
of frugality our first objectives. There are at least three grounds for this:
the maintenance of human dignity, the protection of our own generation
against the danger of pollution, and the conservation for future genera-
tions of the limited natural resources of our planet. We need to replace
the ideal insinuated by the advertising industry with the ideal exempli-
fied in Buddhist and Christian monasticism.” (Choose Life, pp. 61–62)
Dr. Toynbee, I believe, was without doubt a man of keen foresight,
who was deeply concerned about the future of the human race. The
rules that he advocates for the restriction of greed and the model he
offers for the ideal human life represent a guiding principle for the
entire human race.
Civilization and Environmental Conflict
Ji: The differences between East and West, as we have noted, are very
great. In the last several hundred years, when Western culture has swept
over the entire globe, Westerners, obeying their mode of keen analytical
thinking, have pursued their objective of conquering nature. And what
are the results? As anyone can plainly see, they are disastrous indeed!
Human wants can never be fully satisfied. But there are limits to what
nature can endure. To a certain extent, to be sure, nature can satisfy the
needs and wants of human beings. But when those bounds are over-
stepped, then punishment descends on humankind, sometimes very ter-
rible punishment.
Even in China we have at times become carried away and have cut
down vast acres of forest in order to create farmlands. And everyone
knows what the result has been. The Yangtze River has become, as the
Yellow River has been in the past, the scene of raging floods.
Human destruction of the environment proceeds apace in both East
and West, but since the Industrial Revolution in the West, it has reached
its most severe level yet. Looking at the world as a whole, we see that,
through the dominance of Western culture, ecological balances have
been upset, acid rain has become widespread, fresh water resources are
depleted, the atmosphere is polluted, the ozone layer threatened, and
rivers and oceans have become filled with pollution.
Various species of life have been wiped out, new diseases have
appeared—it is enough to threaten the future growth and development
of the human race, and in fact to threaten its very existence. If these ills
are not somehow overcome, human beings will not survive the next
hundred years.
These evils and abuses are apparent before our very eyes. No one can
say that such predictions are merely the words of an alarmist.
Jiang: This is not mere alarmist talk by any means. I am sure, Professor
Ji, that after careful consideration of the situation, you simply wish to
sound a warning bell for the rest of the world.
You have mentioned the sudden eruption of new diseases in your list
of ills. As an example we might cite the appearance of the mad cow
sickness in Europe in the past several years. Since Europeans are so
fond of eating beef, it has caused them much apprehension. Many peo-
ple turn pale just on hearing the word “cow,” and have accordingly
switched to the eating of pork instead.
And then, when no one expected it, foot-and-mouth disease broke out
among the pork producers of Europe, so that now the eating of pork has
come to be regarded as dangerous as well. It is reported that former
pork eaters have now begun eating horse meat, since horses are not
affected by foot-and-mouth disease.
With problems such as these threatening the lives of human beings,
one cannot sound too many alarms to wake them to the dangers ahead.
And in the past Professor Ji has pointed out a very significant fact,
namely, that with all these worrisome problems threatening the world,
those who are in important positions of power and could do something
about them if they would, are simply pretending that they do not see the
problems and are failing to take action. As though living in a dream
world, they go on as in the past, content to engage day and night in their
usual struggles for power and endless pursuit of profit.
Ikeda: Thirty years ago the founder of the Club of Rome, Aurerlio Pec-
cei, with whom I have held dialogues, issued a report on the “Limits of
Growth,” warning that, if growth continues at the present rate, in a hun-
dred years the world will have reached the limit in terms of population
industrialization, pollution, and the consumption of food and natural
resources.
Of course, even before the modern era there have occurred clashes
between human civilizations and the environment, and such civiliza-
tions have paid for their excessive demands upon nature by in many
cases being wiped out. But in the growth that has taken place in the
twentieth century, exploitation of nature has been carried out on a glob-
al scale, and these last thirty years have seen an acceleration in the rate
of growth. The destruction of ecosystems that Professor Ji has men-
tioned, and the disruptions in the cyclical flow of energy and matter—
each day we can almost sense with our bodies the changes that have
taken place.
Human society and its economic activities have clearly reached the
“limits of growth” that this one life zone that is our earth will allow. In
order to check the kind of growth we have been talking about and head
it in the direction of greater regulation and restraint, we must somehow
bring about a change of direction in our civilization itself.
Jiang: In an earlier meeting I have quoted from a work by the eminent

Chinese philosopher Jin Yuelin. I would like now to quote again from
the same work, Chinese Philosophy. He writes: “The West’s preoccupa-
tion with the conquering of nature causes human nature to be even more
arbitrary in its actions and invites even greater danger.
“Efforts to inject a more human element into science and industry are
simply an attempt to bring them into greater harmony with human
nature and to prevent the successes of science and industry from being
used for killing, destruction, or other savage ends. Some thinkers have
felt that, in order to protect civilization, the individual and society must
be controlled, and people must be awakened to the need for such con-
trol.
“We must think deeply and take great care not to use the word ‘con-
quer’ lightly. In a sense, and in a very important sense, neither the
humane element in man’s makeup nor the inhuman element has ever
once been conquered.
“The laws of nature have never once, for the benefit of human beings
or at human command, ceased to be effective or been brought to a halt.
What we humans do in order to bring about a temporary fulfillment of
human wishes is simply, by creating a certain situation, to use one law
of nature to act as a defense against another law of nature. If we should
seriously attempt to conquer nature by somehow imprisoning it, it
would surely retaliate in any number of ways. Before long, cracks
would appear, water would gush forth, mountains would crumble and
the earth break open.
“And the true character of human beings is the same. For example,
because of original sin, decadent states of mind arise, people are shorn
of their dignity or led into outbursts of anger, and these become ele-
ments that destroy others or are antisocial in character.” (op. cit, pp.
251–52.)
This work of Professor Jin Yuelin was published in 1943, but I
believe that what it has to say is highly important and founded upon
profound discernment. It offers guidance with regard to the develop-
ment of human society that is of long-term significance and relevant
even today. In the excerpt I have just quoted, I believe that many intel-
lectual leaders throughout the world, despite the differences in their cul-
tural background, their experiences in life and their professional con-

cerns, will find much to agree with.
Dr. Toynbee, Dr. Jin Yuelin, Professor Ji, Mr. Ikeda, and the various
scholars of East and West who have engaged in dialogues with Mr.
Ikeda, are all in agreement in the proposals and persuasive views they
have put forth regarding the future direction of human civilization. That
is, they all agree that it must without fail advance in a manner that has
humanity as its focus and center. A friend of mine attended the Global
Forum held at Davo in Switzerland in 1999 and reported that the theme
of the forum was expressed in English by the slogan “human-faced
globalization.” Recently he informed me that this slogan has now been
changed to read “human-centered, globalization.” From this we can see
that the concept of human-centeredness, though it may be interpreted
somewhat differently by various interest groups, has become the focus
of wide attention on an international scale.
Stability and Peace before Progress
Ji: In the dialogues between you, Mr. Ikeda, and Dr. Toynbee, it is stat-
ed that the greatest problem confronting humanity now is not so much
progress as it is peace and stability. This strikes me as a very wise
observation. At present, all worthy people throughout the world must be
keenly aware of the gravity of this problem.
But although many of them are aware of the problem, they are not
necessarily aware of its connection with Western culture. In my opin-
ion, however, one can not consider these matters without considering
the relationship they bear to Western culture.
As we have noted earlier, from around the 1920’s and up until the
present, there have been intellectuals in the West who already sensed
that Western culture was in a period of decay. Professor Qian Binsi
states, “For the past fifty years, European culture has followed a path of
decline.” And persons of foresight in the West have held the very same
view. This view corresponds largely with my own, and I therefore sec-
ond it.
Westerners, with their science and technology based on their mode of
analytical thinking, believe that they are in possession of the absolute
truth, but they are unable to solve many of the problems related to the
world of nature and human society. They believe that through their
advances in the natural sciences they have been able to grasp the truth,
and they have grown arrogant and overbearing as a result. But today
they are finding it increasingly difficult to defend their views.
Some of them, facing up frankly to the crisis conditions that have
been brought about by their destruction of nature, yet insist that the situ-
ation can still be saved by Western science. Some people label this the
doctrine of scientism. But I believe it is absolutely impossible for West-
ern science to bring about a successful solution. It is like a person seiz-
ing hold of his own hair and trying to pull himself up off the ground—it
is utterly impossible.
Ikeda: As you have just said, Professor Ji, the crux of the problem lies
in the method itself, the approach based upon the mode of analytical
thinking that seeks to reduce things to their basic elements. Specializa-
tion that tears the object of study apart in the name of greater specializa-
tion, abstraction that takes a living, breathing reality and turns it into an
abstract entity, mechanism that deprives that reality of the life force that
infuses it, the method of reductionism that would strip away variety in
order to achieve monism, that would cut up the whole into separate
pieces—this ideal of modern times has been used as a weapon with
which to dominate nature, and with the knowledge gained thereby, it
has achieved unquestionable victories.
But the knowledge gained through this type of reasoning can never
be more than a limited portion of the basic substance under observation.
Yet this approach has become dogma in the thinking of people of mod-
ern times, dominating their whole outlook, and this has given rise to
problems. And now, with the twentieth century, we see nature, which
was thought to have been conquered and brought under control, taking a
most ferocious revenge.
The environmental problems of a global nature we face today are
highly complex in nature and intimately connected with other problems
such as widening economic differences, the growth of poverty, and
problems of population and energy.
The Buddhist World View of Dependent Origination
Ji: Is there any remedy for such problems? Surely there must be. As I
see it, the remedy is for the synthetic mode of thinking of Eastern cul-
ture to come to the rescue of the analytical mode of thinking of Western
culture.
We must first of all adopt the philosophy of the Chinese and the other
peoples of East Asia, in particular the concept that is most vital to it,
that of “Heaven and humankind as one,” and on this basis deal with the
world of nature, abandon our evil practices, adopt beneficial ones, and
carry out a basic reform in our approach. Only when we do so is there
hope that the human race may continue to enjoy a happy existence.
If we hope to bring a halt to the destruction of nature and escape

nature’s retaliations and punishments, we must use the Eastern concept
of “Heaven and humankind as one” to put an end to the type of thinking
and approach that seeks to conquer nature. Using the same methods as
those used by religion, we must preach the doctrine of “Heaven and
humankind as one” until it has become deeply embedded in people’s
hearts and minds, until they come to honor and obey it as a matter of
second nature. And this doctrine must be preached not only to the West,
but to the East as well.
Jiang: As Professor Ji has pointed out, the problem is that we cannot

ignore this question of scientism. If we could deal properly with the
problem of scientism, this inordinate belief in the validity of the scien-
tific approach, it would be tantamount to effecting a cure for the disease
that threatens the very life of human society, for the greatest ill of our
present age.
This disease of scientism has spread throughout the entire world, and
its symptoms are a belief that science is all-powerful, and a tendency to
emphasize reason and slight the humanities. To cite China as an exam-
ple, we may note that science has become widely misunderstood in that
country. Everywhere we see the word “science” used in careless and
mistaken ways; in Chinese society, particularly in the colleges and uni-
versities, there is a tendency to emphasize reason and slight the humani-
ties. Such tendencies are by no means new, and in fact are growing
more prevalent with each passing day.
By now the disease has become chronic. And the only cure for this
illness of scientism is to cultivate the type of thinking that positively
exalts the humanistic aspects of the human spirit and promote correct
aims and values, and with such thinking set about to educate people and
control society. Stated in specific terms, it is what Professor Ji has just
proposed, namely that we use “the same methods as those used by reli-
gion, preaching the doctrine of ‘Heaven and humankind as one’ until it
has become deeply embedded in people’s hearts and minds, until they
come to honor and obey it as a matter of second nature. And this doc-
trine must be preached not only to the West, but to the East as well.”
Ikeda: As has been stated earlier, East Asia has a long and rich tradi-
tion of synthetic type thought. The concept expressed in Chinese
thought of “Heaven and humankind as one” and the Buddhist concept
of EshØ Funi or the oneness of life and its environment are typical
examples of such synthetic thinking.
These days we hear a great deal about the study of “complex sys-
tems,” but this concept bears a very striking resemblance to the Bud-
dhist world view of dependent origination. The study of the process by
which various elements, while maintaining a mutual relationship, gen-
erate and develop in such a way as to create a new type of order—this is
the concept of dependent origination.
Ji: In the West in recent years the study of such new fields has become
very popular, as we know from references to “fuzzy theory” or “chaos
theory.” Such new fields of academic study are not necessarily all alike
in content, but even where they differ in content, I believe they have
certain intellectual characteristics in common. These characteristics dif-
fer from those of the traditional Western mode of analytical thinking.
Rather they tend to stress universal relationships, and to be in this sense
closer to the Eastern mode of synthetic thinking, since they include a
certain number of generalizing ideas.
Ikeda: These days, even in the West, the paradigm or definition of what
is meant by the word “knowledge” is undergoing a change. It is shifting
from a mechanistic world view to one based on the concept of the life
force, from an approach that reduces things to their basic elements to
one that sees them comprehensively, from a view of nature as made up
of unrelated phenomena to one that stresses the interrelatedness of
nature. In other words, it is moving in a new direction that brings it
closer to the generalizing concepts of Eastern thinking.
And therefore in many fields such as the social sciences, economics,
science and technology, we see the use of new terms such as ecology,
fluctuation, self-organization, holon, homeostasis and symbiosis, terms
that refer to the inclination of all things to live together in a symbiotic
relationship.
And any new world order that emerges must likewise be based upon
the synthetic mode of thought, one that is capable of simultaneously
understanding both the impulses toward unification and those toward
variety that are inherent in the present. We must, it seems, respond to
two contradictory demands, one that seeks to create a single global cul-
ture, and another that sees the need to develop a variety of different
local cultures.
In the world at present, where information and capital are rapidly
being globalized in nature, there is a strong tendency for Western or
European values to become the single standard. At the same time, the
countries or local areas that are unable to keep up with this tendency are
becoming isolated and set apart from the rest of the world because of
their differences.
But any culture, whatever it is, will take on a new shape when it is
combined with elements from other and different cultures. Particularly
in our modern age, it is sincere confrontation with the dilemma of
whether to become Europeanized or to retain native ways, whether to
opt for progress or for tradition, that provides the chief motive power
for cultural creation. In this sense, therefore, we should not be unduly
alarmed at the prospect of a “clash of civilizations.” This is especially
true for East Asia, which possesses a rich store of wisdom that will
enable it to surmount any such clashes.
Thirty Years, River West; Thirty Years, River East
Ji: At present the cultures of East and West have become fused, and this
process of fusion will no doubt continue in the future. If this means
there has been a fusion of the very best elements in Eastern and Western
culture, then undoubtedly human culture as a whole will be elevated to
new levels of excellence.
But to my way of thinking, in this process of fusion one party must
act as leader and the other must be the follower. Eastern culture must be
the leader, and Western culture must accept the role of follower.
Because only Eastern culture can save culture as a whole from the
predicament in which it finds itself.
There are only two major cultural systems in the world today, that of
the East and that of the West. If the light fades in the West, then the East
will shine. The twenty-first century will as a matter of course be a time
when the light of Eastern culture once more shines forth.
Ikeda: Ah yes, “The light from the East,” as the saying has it. The time
has surely come when the dawn light of Eastern wisdom will shine out
upon the world.
But if this vision should make a single misstep one cannot help fear-
ing that it may fall into a kind of self-centered Asian-ism or Japan-ism.
In Japan before and during the Pacific War, we may recall, there were
loud calls for what was known as “a modern conquest,” in which the
crisis brought about by the material civilization of the modern West was
to be overcome by an adherence to the traditional spiritual values of
Japan and East Asia. Just how much self-righteous delusion can be
brought about by thinking of this type has been amply demonstrated by
the unprecedented suffering inflicted upon the rest of Asia, and upon
China in particular, by the aggressive warfare carried out by Japan with
this ideology as its justification.

Jaspers, in his “The Origin and Aim of History,” states: “The con-
frontation between Europe and Asia must not be substantialized in
metaphysical terms. To substantialize it in such fashion would be to turn
it into a fearful specter.” To invest what is no more than a dualistic rep-
resentation with substantial form verges on an excessive simplification
of reality.
Ji: My approach, needless to say, does not envision any rejection or

wiping out of Western culture. It is entirely different. Such an approach
as that would be utter foolishness. I am not in any sense denying the
shining achievements that have been realized up to now by Western cul-
ture. That would be quite impossible, and would go against the princi-
ples that govern the advancement of human society.
What I am suggesting is that, building on the high level of advance-
ment already achieved by Western culture, we should progress a step
further, aiming for a new height never before reached in the history of
human culture. As I have indicated earlier, the saying “Thirty years,
River west; thirty years, River east,” or turn and turn about, is the way
we should proceed in order for human society to realize its objective.
The correct procedure is to carry on all the splendid achievements
realized by Western culture over the past several hundred years, and at
the same time use the synthetic thinking of Eastern culture to rescue us
from the predicament brought about by the analytic thinking of Western
culture, in this way advancing human culture as a whole to newer and
higher levels of development.
Dr. Toynbee’s Views on Asia
Ikeda: Advancing human culture to new heights never before
achieved—it seems to me a splendid vision of a global civilization! To
seek to raise human culture to new heights is to make human beings
more humane, to make civilization more truly civilized.
But, Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno (1903–69) and Max Horkheimer
(1895–1973) as though anticipating the tragedies of Auschwitz and
Hiroshima, in The Dialect of Enlightenment write, “Why does
humankind, instead of entering into a condition of true humanity, sink
rather into some new kind of barbarism?”
Reason in modern times, while shining with the beam of enlighten-
ment, has also revealed to us new areas of barbarous darkness where
such light never penetrates. The attempt to pursue rationality to its fur-
thest extent has on the contrary led to the destruction of human beings
and threatens to destroy the globe itself, the only habitation we humans
possess—paradoxically irrational result if there ever was one!
The East, I believe, must transcend the dualistic confrontation of East
and West and employ its creative power to work for the advancement of
human culture as a whole. Dr. Toynbee placed profound hopes in the
enormous hidden powers of China to work toward this end.
Ji: In the dialogues held between you and Dr. Toynbee, you touch often
on the problems facing humankind in the future. This is indeed a very
important question, I believe.
Dr. Toynbee, speaking on this subject, has the following to say;
“Eastern Asia preserves a number of historical assets that may enable it
to become the geographical and cultural axis for the unification of the
whole world. These assets are, as I see them: (1) the Chinese people’s
experience, during the last twenty-one centuries, of maintaining an
empire that is a regional model for a literally worldwide world-state; (2)
the ecumenical spirit with which the Chinese have been imbued during
this long chapter of Chinese history; (3) the humanism of the Confucian
Weltanschauung; (4) the rationalism of both Confucianism and Bud-
dhism; (5) the sense of the mystery of the universe and the recognition
that human attempts to dominate the universe are self-defeating (to me,
the most precious intuitions of Taoism); (6) the conviction (shared with
Buddhism and Shinto by Chinese philosophy of all schools, except per-
haps the now extinct Legalist school) that, far from trying to dominate
nonhuman nature, man’s aim should be to live in harmony with it; (7)
the demonstration, by the Japanese people, that it is possible for East
Asian peoples to beat the Western peoples at the Westerner’s own mod-
ern game of applying science to both civilian and military technology;
(8) the courage shown by both the Japanese and the Vietnamese in dar-
ing to challenge the West. This courage will, I hope, survive but be ded-
icated, in the next chapter of mankind’s history, to the constructive
enterprise of helping mankind to put its affairs in order peacefully.”
(Choose Life p. 249.)
And you, Mr. Ikeda, in response to this have stated: “I do not think
that the Chinese are a people with aggressive ambitions. On the con-
trary, I regard them as essentially pacificists seeking peace and security
for their own country.” (Ibid, p. 252.)
I am wholly in agreement with these views.
Jiang: I too am of the same opinion as Professor Ji. Traditional Chinese

culture has always sought to achieve “peace throughout the realm;” it is
a culture of peace. The Chinese people are unparalleled in their love for
peace.
As you know, China pays immense respect to the memory of upright
officials and heroes of the people such as Bao Zheng, Hai Rui, Yue (Yo)
Fei, Wen Tianxiang, Deng Shichang, Lin Zexu and Zhang Xueliang.
The patriotism of the Chinese people of course strives to repel any out-
side invasion and to protect the nation, but it shows no tendencies
toward foreign invasion or expansionism.
Twenty years have passed since the reformed liberation policies were
first put into effect in China, and the economy of the nation has begun
to develop and advance. But there are still many complex problems
associated with the task of reform.
Certain persons have appeared in various countries of the West who
speak loudly of the “threat posed by China,” but such persons have
wholly misunderstood the history of China and its present condition.
My purpose in mentioning such misunderstandings here is to emphasize
that what the world needs now is greater exchange and communication
among the peoples of the various different nations.
Scientific and Technological Advance and Spiritual Stagnation
Ikeda: For several years now I have been warning against the tendency
toward nationalism that exists in certain circles in Japan. As in the so-
called textbook controversy, we observe various statements and actions
that tend to deny the historical reality of Japan’s aggressive warfare
against China, and I find this highly regrettable. In order to do every-
thing within my power to combat such tendencies, I hope to continue
my efforts to promote cultural and educational exchange with the peo-
ple of China.
Dr. Toynbee, speaking of the crisis facing modern civilization, char-
acterized it as in essence a “morality gap.” By this he meant that, while
science and technology have advanced to an overwhelming degree,
morality, ethics, the things of the spirit have stagnated, and this has cre-
ated a gap between the two areas. This is particularly true in the more
advanced countries, where, in contrast to the great expansion in material
wealth, spiritual anomie has reached alarming proportions.
With the so-called information revolution, it has now become possi-
ble for us to receive vast amounts of information. But, rather than prof-
iting from this, we find ourselves swamped in data, mentally and spiri-
tually we lose our sense of control and are left in a state of stupefaction.
Spiritual advancement—the only way to achieve this is to engage in an
incessant struggle of the mind and spirit against the state of stagnation
in which we find ourselves.
As Dr. Toynbee has pointed out in the passage quoted earlier, China,
with its basis in Confucianism, Taoism and Chinese Buddhism, has a
rich spiritual soil capable of providing the ethical and moral founda-
tions needed to support the spirit of humanism and pacifism. In order to
advance in spirit, humankind must learn from the spiritual and ethical
heritage of Chinese people.
Ji: With regard to the future of humankind, it seems to me that the per-
sons in our country and abroad can be roughly divided into three class-
es, namely, the optimists, the pessimists, and those who haven’t thought
about the matter and don’t care anyway.
The optimists, believing that the more humanity changes, the better it
becomes, foresee a rosy future. The pessimists proclaim that the human
race will very soon meet its end. Some even predict that the end may
well come about in the twenty-first century.
The third category embraces the vast majority of human beings. It
includes some who get along swimmingly in the world and spend their
days eating and drinking, and others who are in the depths of poverty
and are struggling just to stay alive. Most of these people give not a sin-
gle thought to the future of humankind, but continue, as in the past, to
spend their days in a wholly meaningless and indiscriminate manner.
I belong to the party of the optimists. Yes, at present society faces a
great many problems. Public feeling is in a state of turmoil; natural dis-
asters, human-made disasters, the flames of war spread all around us;
moral values are vanishing, everything is topsy-turvy, and all signs
point to a calamitous ending. But I continue to believe that these are no
more than passing phenomena, and that the future of the human race
will invariably take a turn for the better.
The Great Unity and the Creation of Value
Ikeda: Like Professor Ji, I too belong to the optimist party. I take my
stance in a firm doctrine of optimism and feel a strong responsibility to
work to create a shining future for humankind.
Jiang: I am like Mr. Ikeda, a believer in optimism. I am firmly con-

vinced that human beings possess an inexhaustible fund of wisdom,
unlimited courage and creative power, and that they will surely open up
a bright path into the future.
Ji: In China from early times we have had the concept of Datong, the
Great Commonalty or Great Unity. According to this concept, though it
may require much time and many steps in the process, humanity will
invariably keep moving in the direction of an ideal state known as the
Great Unity. In his work entitled Datongshu or Book of the Great Unity,
the philosopher and reformer Kang Youwei described the ideal in some-
what Utopian terms, and yet the basic spirit underlying it is quite ratio-
nal and it embraces values that are highly worthy of adoption.
Jiang: It is just as you have said. Human society will at some point
unfailingly set out to realize the ideal world of Great Unity. In China
this concept of Datong has penetrated deeply into the hearts and minds
of the people.
When I was an elementary school student, my schoolmates and I read
in our Chinese language textbook the passage from the Record of Rites
in which Confucius describes the Datong ideal, and we discussed its
meaning. Even today when people refer to a society that is peaceful and
stable, they use the phrase Tianxia wei gong, “a world shared by all
alike,” which comes from that passage, or speak of a society in which
“people do not pick up objects dropped in the road, and gates are not
locked at night,” words that describe the ideal world of Great Unity. I
dare say that in China there is no one who opposes the Great Unity
ideal. There is much that is worthy to be learned from this concept as it
is set forth in Kang Youwei’s Book of the Great Unity.
And Kang Youwei’s ideas for social and political reform also deserve
careful consideration. The most important thinker in present day China
who carries on and works to promote these reformist ideas of Kang
Youwei is the eminent philosopher Li Zehou. I myself agree in general
with Professor Li’s opinions.
Ikeda: Kang Youwei faced squarely up to the dilemma confronting

China as to whether to seek to preserve traditional ways or to adopt a
course of Westernization, and he fought resolutely to achieve the ideal
of a Great Unity in which all persons and all things comprise a single
entity. This concept of the Great Unity described in the Liyun chapter of
the Confucian classic, the Record of Rites, envisions an ideal society
that subsumes both traditional Confucian ideas and those of Buddhism
and Western science and technology as well.
As Kang Youwei himself states in his Book of the Great Unity,
“Since we have all received life from the great earth, the people of the
entire globe are all my brothers and sisters, and when I come to know
them, I will feel a sense of love and kinship for them.”

Kang Youwei’s whole life was devoted to understanding all living
beings, living in harmony with them and sharing their joys and hard-
ships, a life pulsating with emotions of love and humaneness. At the
same time he clearly had a very concrete conception of how social sys-
tems could be step by step unified, nations could merge together, until
in the end world federation government could be established. And he
was also a confirmed feminist, insisting that the equality of men and
women was a principle established by Heaven and the correct path for
humanity.
In the concept of Great Unity and the spirit behind it I myself see a
model for what I call the ethos of symbiosis, a method by which people
and people, people and nature, can live together, aiding and supporting
one another and achieving a state of mutual prosperity.
Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, the first president of the Soka Gakkai,
believed and taught that the aim of human life should be the “creation
of value,” and that education should develop the power to create value. I
myself think that the aim of humanity and the aim of civilization should
be the creation of value. And that what we should strive for now is the
worldwide creation of the value of Great Commonalty or Great Unity,
of symbiosis and harmony.
The “wisdom of the East” which we three have been examining in
our discussions here will without doubt enable us to overcome the many
global problems that confront us, to develop the creative power of
humankind, and to continue to create values of global validity. My wish
is that I may join with you two gentlemen in creating an era when the
wisdom of the East will shine forth, a Century of Life.
Ji Xianlin
Born 1911 in Qingping (now Linqing), China. Graduated from
Tsinghua University in 1934. Traveled to Germany in 1935 and
spent the years 1936–1945 at the University of Göttingen studying
the ancient languages of India and Tocharian, receiving a Ph.D
from the university in 1941. Returned to China in 1946 to post of
professor at the Oriental Languages Faculty of Peking University.
Subsequently held a variety of posts including head (dean) of the
Oriental Languages Faculty; Vice-President of Peking University;
member of the Philosophy and Social Sciences Faculty of the Chi-
nese Academy of Sciences; member of the National Committee of
the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference; Member
of the Standing Committee of the People’s Republic of China
National People’s Congress; Chairman of the Linguistics Society
of China, and Chairman of the China Comparative Literature Soci-
ety. Current posts include Chairman of the Chinese Dunhuang-Tur-
pan Society. Major works include a collection of essays on ancient
Indian languages; The Language Problems of Primeval Buddhism;
Papers on the History of Sino-Indian Relations; Papers of Ji Xian-
lin on Buddhist Studies; China and Eastern Cultures; Tocharian
Studies; Translation from the Tokharian Maitreyasamitinataka; A
History of Sugar, and Collation and Annotation on “Records of the
Western Regions of the Great Tang Dynasty” (editor-in-chief).
Translated works include Ramayana and Shakuntala and prose: Ji
Xianlin: Essays and Studying in Germany for Ten Years.
Jiang Zhongxin
Born 1942 in Shanghai. Graduated 1965 from the Oriental Lan-
guages Faculty of Peking University, becoming a research assis-
tant at the Institute of Historical Studies at the Chinese Academy
of Social Sciences. 1979 appointed Assistant Research Fellow at
the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences/Peking University Insti-
tute of South Asian Studies; 1986 an Associate Research Fellow at
the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Institute of Asia-Pacific
Studies, and 1991 a Professorial Research Fellow of the same
Institute. Major works include Saddharmapuˆ∂ar¥kasËtra: a San-
skrit Palm-leaf Manuscript Kept in the Library of the Cultural
Palace of the Nationalities (facsimile edition), A Sanskrit Manu-

script of Saddharmapuˆ∂ar¥ka Kept in the Library of the Cultural
Palace of the Nationalities, Beijing (romanized text), The Tradi-
tion of Manu: Translation and Annotation, Collation and Annota-
tion on “Records of the Western Regions of the Great Tang
Dynasty” (coeditor), A Modern Chinese Translation of “Records of
the Western Regions of the Great Tang Dynasty” (co-translator),
Sanskrit Lotus Sutra Fragments from the Lüshun Museum Collec-
tions. In 1990 awarded the “Commendation for young and middle-
aged experts of most illustrious contributions” by the Ministry of
Personnel of the People’s Republic of China.
Daisaku Ikeda
Born 1928 in Tokyo. Honorary president of Soka Gakkai. Presi-
dent of Soka Gakkai International (SGI). As a Buddhist leader,
author, poet and educator has launched numerous initiatives in
areas such as peace, the environment and education, lectured at
universities on these topics, always with an underlying theme of
the “humanism” of Buddhism, and engaged in dialogue with many
national and cultural leaders and academics worldwide. Founder
of numerous educational institutions including the Soka Kinder-
garten, Soka Elementary School, Soka Gakuen Educational Foun-
dation and Soka University, plus academic research institutions
and peace organizations including the Toda Institute for Global
Peace and Policy Research, Institute of Oriental Philosophy and
Boston Research Center for the 21st Century, and cultural institu-
tions such as the Tokyo Fuji Art Museum and Min-On Concert
Association. Ikeda is also author of over 100 publications includ-
ing a novel, The Human Revolution (in 12 volumes), and collected
dialogues including Choose Life: A Dialogue (with Arnold Toyn-
bee), Spiritual Lessons of the Twentieth Century (with Mikhail
Gorbachev), and Quest for a Bright New Century (with Jin Yong).
The majority of these works have been translated and published in
English, Chinese and numerous other languages. Awarded the
United Nations Peace Medal in 1983. Recipient of honorary pro-
fessorships and doctorates from many universities around the
world, including Peking University.
Feature: The Lotus Sutra:
Historical Development and Contemporary Issues
From the 36th International Congress of Asian and

North African Studies (ICANAS 2000)
The International Congress of Asian and North African Studies—

ICANAS 2000 was held in Montreal, Canada between August 27–Sep-
tember 2, 2000. The Institute of Oriental Philosophy organized panels
for the Congress on the subject of the Lotus Sutra. The authors of the
essays presented by this panel have revised their work for inclusion in
this issue of the Journal. ICANAS, the world’s largest international con-
gress for researchers of the history, philosophy, religion and science of
Asia and North Africa, was launched in 1873 as the International Con-
gress of Orientalists, and the Montreal ICANAS was the 36th Congress
to date. The theme for this 36th Congress was “Oriental and Asian
Studies in the Era of Globalization: Heritage and Modernity—Opportu-
nities and Challenges.” The theme for one panel was “Lotus Sutra—
Past, Present, Future,” in which four panelists: Jonathan A. Silk, asso-
ciate professor at Yale University (“The Place of the Lotus Sutra in
Indian Buddhism”); Soka University professor Hiroshi Kanno (“The
Reception of the Teaching of the Lotus Sutra in China”); Prof. Koichi
Miyata, also of Soka University (“The Reception and Impact of the
Lotus Sutra in Japan”) and He Jinsong, associate professor at the Insti-
tute for Study of World Religions, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
(“SGI President Daisaku Ikeda and the Lotus Sutra”) gave presenta-
tions on how the Lotus Sutra was received and its development at differ-
ent times and locations. The theme for the other panel was “The Lotus
Sutra and Global Issues.” Panelists Soka University professor Toru
Shiotsu (“Mahayana Buddhism and Human Rights”); A. Walter Dorn,
visiting professor at Royal Military Collage (“Lotus on the Lake—How
Eastern Spirituality Contributes to the Vision of World Peace”); Prof.
Shuichi Yamamoto of Soka University (“Mahayana Buddhism and Envi-
ronmental Ethics”) and Yoichi Kawada, director of the Institute of Ori-
ental Philosophy (“Buddhism and Bioethics”) discussed the wisdom of
the Lotus Sutra as a response to the many issues faced by modern soci-
ety.
86

Dialogues On Eastern Wisdom

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dialogues On Eastern Wisdom

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Special Series:

Dialogues on Eastern Wisdom (1)

HUMAN NATURE AND SOCIETY

I am also delighted that Professor Jiang Zhongxin of the Chinese

Jiang: I am rather embarrassed that Mr. Ikeda should include me

Ji: Since we have mentioned the Toynbee dialogues, I would like to

Sophists that “the good is that which is pleasurable.” In contrast to this

Ikeda: One reason that Mencius’ theory of the innate goodness of

Confucian text, the Zhongyong or Mean, which read: “What Heaven

Ji: Mencius develops his theory of the goodness of human nature

Ikeda: Mencius replies to Gaozi’s argument in the following way: “It is

Jiang: Mencius’ theory of the goodness of human nature is closely

Ikeda: Xunzi’s political thought, particularly in comparison to that of

Ji: Xunzi is of course clearly wrong when he refers to instinct as evil.

of where this thing called human instinct comes from—what I have

dent upon the type of consciousness that is developed in the human

Ikeda: Speaking from the point of view of a Buddhist believer, I would

Ji: I would say that at present it is very simple to set up a standard by

Jiang: I am in complete agreement with Mr. Ikeda when he states that

And if we wish to describe the mutual relations that exist between

EASTERN CULTURE AND WESTERN CULTURE

Toward a Definition of Culture

subjectivity of action, we may say, is a special characteristic of human

includes within it such elements as customs, laws, art, morality, science

Jiang: Professor Ji’s definition of culture without doubt conveys in a

Jiang: The author of The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of

selves in clan-based units or community groups, and cultural exchange

Jiang: Professor Ji made a very apt and important point when he

Jiang: Professor Ji in his lecture entitled “The Inevitability and Com-

Ikeda: There are various ways of determining what constitutes a cultur-

Ji: If we examine these four cultural systems that I have mentioned in

thinking with regard to nature and human affairs alike.

Jiang: Whether or not matter can be infinitely divided—this is a major

cepts. Therefore, it is not correct to cite the statement by Zhuangzi in

renowned physicist. At that time he expressed great interest in the wis-

Jiang: Discussions of these questions will no doubt continue for a long

Ikeda: The analytical reasoning methods of Western culture have

Characteristics of Synthetic Thinking

Ikeda: Traditional Chinese medicine has always been distinguished by

Ji: I have mentioned earlier the concept in ancient China of “Heaven

Ikeda: The Indologists B. K. Matilal has suggested that we might view

term myØsØ, corresponds to the Sanscrit words nåma and samsthana, or

From West to East

detail the concept of “Heaven and humankind as one,” which represents

THE ESSENCE OF EASTERN CULTURE:

China’s Role in World Peace

Ji: In my opinion, Dr. Toynbee showed keen foresight in expressing

Ikeda: The ideal of an ethos of symbiosis, one that represents a dynam-

Ji: The Eastern ideal of “Heaven and humanity as one” is reflected in

Ikeda: The concept of “Heaven and humanity as one” expresses the

The Spirit behind “Heaven and Humankind As One”:

Ji: The word ren or “humankind” is easy enough to understand. It

this concept of EshØ Funi, remarked to me that it would be quite under-

I do not think the passage needs any explanation—it is permeated

between the two major rivers underwent a process of revolutionary

With regard to the phrase “Heaven and humankind as one,” Dr.

Ji: The origin of this concept of “Heaven and humankind as one” is

Ikeda: As a believer in Buddhism, what interests me is what sort of

In India, it had been understood that living beings are capable of

Ji: I would like here to quote some concrete examples of Confucian

Ikeda: I presume you are referring to the passage in the Analects in

teristics were gradually shed, and it came to be viewed as a law or prin-

sees the laws or principles of the natural world as constituting ethical